Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Stratis storage pool #6519

Closed
DemiMarie opened this issue Apr 10, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Stratis storage pool #6519

DemiMarie opened this issue Apr 10, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
C: storage P: minor Priority: minor. The lowest priority, below "default." R: declined Resolution: While a legitimate bug or proposal, it has been decided that no action will be taken. T: enhancement Type: enhancement. A new feature that does not yet exist or improvement of existing functionality.

Comments

@DemiMarie
Copy link

The problem you're addressing (if any)
QubesOS heavily relies on fast snapshots, which LVM is not designed for. Furthermore, LVM only offers a command-line interface and an interactive shell. The D-Bus API is incomplete, and the C and Python APIs are deprecated.

Describe the solution you'd like
Like LVM thin provisioning, Stratis uses dm-thin internally. However, Stratis is a persistent daemon with a D-Bus API, and so (hopefully) can perform snapshots much faster. Additionally, Stratis intends to offer integrity support, and may do so already.

Where is the value to a user, and who might that user be?
Users who need high I/O throughput will be able to obtain faster qube starts. Furthermore, integrity support is a necessary first step towards untrusted storage domains.

Describe alternatives you've considered
We could keep the existing LVM2 pool, or switch to BTRFS.

Additional context
This is not intended as a replacement for the BTRFS pool, but rather as an improved version of the LVM2 pool. Stratis is Red Hat’s next generation storage offering and so should be highly stable and reliable, provided that it is not misused. BTRFS is more robust to space exhaustion and other errors, at (potentially) a cost in throughput.

Relevant documentation you've consulted

Related, non-duplicate issues
#6476
@DemiMarie DemiMarie added T: enhancement Type: enhancement. A new feature that does not yet exist or improvement of existing functionality. P: minor Priority: minor. The lowest priority, below "default." labels Apr 10, 2021
@andrewdavidwong andrewdavidwong added this to the TBD milestone Apr 10, 2021
@DemiMarie
Copy link
Author

Stratis does not support raw images. Closing.

@andrewdavidwong andrewdavidwong added the R: declined Resolution: While a legitimate bug or proposal, it has been decided that no action will be taken. label Apr 11, 2021
@DemiMarie
Copy link
Author

To elaborate: while Stratis could be used on a Qubes system, this would use the reflink storage pool on an XFS filesystem.

@andrewdavidwong andrewdavidwong removed this from the Release TBD milestone Jul 10, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
C: storage P: minor Priority: minor. The lowest priority, below "default." R: declined Resolution: While a legitimate bug or proposal, it has been decided that no action will be taken. T: enhancement Type: enhancement. A new feature that does not yet exist or improvement of existing functionality.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@DemiMarie @andrewdavidwong