Storage support?

Gustavo Niemeyer gustavo.niemeyer at
Wed Jul 13 20:10:54 UTC 2011

> I agree that it would be very useful.  I don't know about handling it from
> within a formula, though.  If formulas are concerned with deploying and
> exposing services, it may not be a good idea to begin considering things
> like block devices a service (elastic or otherwise).  I'd personally prefer
> to see storage provisioning handled internally by ensemble in the same way
> machines are currently launched.  This would allow ensemble to abstract away
> the details of each storage type into the corresponding
> provisioner/environments (EBS for EC2, SAN for Cobbler, nova-volume for
> Openstack, etc). As an added benefit, it would keep the corresponding cloud
> credentials in the ensemble environment and not require them to be
> dispatched to nodes/zookeeper via formulas.

+1!  It also makes sense to me to have it internally handled.

We debated about the concept a few times, and there are quite a few
nice things we can do by understanding the storage semantics used by a
formula (e.g. backups, migrations, etc).

For now, though, we opted to simply use EBS at all times to avoid
handling yet another problem right now, and to ensure people their
data won't magically disappear if the machine is shut down for
whatever reason.

Gustavo Niemeyer

More information about the Ensemble mailing list