Docs release 1.8.0 #415
Docs release 1.8.0 #415
Conversation
updating for 1.8.0 general version information
* CSI-3242: initial input of HyperSwap information * remove volume replication from whatsnew * whatsnew update for version * what's new updates * removed extra spaces (general) * removed HyperSwap limitations for everything except cloning per #397 (comment) * Additional HyperSwap prereqs per #397 (comment) * updated linking * added back in hyperswap with snapshot limitation per #397 (comment) * updated wording of hyperswap limitation note for clarification * clarified hyperswap wording per #397 (comment) * updated slashes for pathing * updated typos
* Spectrum Virtualize Family to "family" * fixing indentation for notes * CSI-3402: prefix book_files dir with a dot * CSI-3403: file name updates
* CSI-3512 initial content update * various typo updates * updated to indicate deduplicated deprecation per #411 (comment)
it wasn't reading properly in transform
rivkap
requested review from
roysahar,
barakda,
ArbelNathan,
erantzabari,
matancarmeli7,
oriyarde,
annaparienti and
tyichye19
per #360 (comment) and to reflect changes from CSI-3512
| - For Fibre Channel connectivity be sure that storage system is using one of the fully supported HBAs compatible with your host connection, as listed in the [IBM® System Storage® Interoperation Center (SSIC)](https://www-03.ibm.com/systems/support/storage/ssic/interoperability.wss). | ||
| - IBM DS8000 family storage systems only supports Fibre Channel connectivity. | ||
|
|
||
| For more information, find your storage system documentation in [IBM Documentation](http://www.ibm.com/docs/). | ||
|
|
||
| 3. **For RHEL OS users:** Ensure that the following packages are installed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ArbelNathan does nvme users need to install anything here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@oriyarde I agree - this should be included in any storage system requirements that we already say that they need to adhere to. (unless there is something special for our driver that they need but I highly doubt that)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but our code uses the nvme list command, regardless of storage system requirements
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Certain things that are based off of storage system configurations need to be left to them. There are certain things that we need to make assumptions that it is covered sufficiently by the storage system documentation. If not, either they, or we, will get customer requests to update accordingly. We did our due diligence and made sure that the command itself is in SV documentation. There is no reason to assume that the customer won't know that it's necessary to implement (even if for some reason it's removed.)
I think that if this is the last issue, we should leave as-is (without adding the extra command) and close this documentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is no reason to assume that the customer won't know that it's necessary to implement (even if for some reason it's removed.)
how would the customer know, if it's not documented (removed)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why do we prefer to perform said due diligence for every storage system for which we add nvme support?
if this is only about time constraint, we could fix it in 1.9.0, it's not urgent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that if this is the last issue
nope (and I don't see how it is relevant to this conversation anyway)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not every comment is a merge blocker. I provided my input. if you guys prefer the current way, so be it
docs/content/configuration/creating_storageclass_topology_aware.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
deduplicated=deprecated. removing from examples
docs/content/configuration/creating_volumereplicationclass_topology_aware.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should list nvme-cli in case of future changes, but it seems ok for others for now
No description provided.