Comment 3 for bug 1687880
Revision history for this message
| Sofia Enriquez (lsofia-enriquez) wrote | #3 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
513534c
demo site
(Get the code!)
This topic was discussed at Victoria PTG:
Firstly, we should change the API to allow a new size to be specified during a volume migration. For retype, Gorka suggested that we could allow a flag similar to the current migration_policy in the retype request, which gives the user the option to say it's OK to perform a migration if it's required. We could have a flag indicating that it's OK for the volume to be increased in size if it's required for the retype to succeed. This way we don't go behind the user's back -- we fail if the volume won't fit, and allow them to retype to a new size if they want the retype to succeed.
Finally, I should add a note to the docs explaining that retyping an unencrypted volume to the same size encrypted volume will most likely fail (so that users know not to try this in older releases)
https:/