Hi Juan,

your right, manually selecting an ephemeral storage ami-id in environments.yaml 
config will bypass ensemble picking an ebs ami-id.

cheers,

Kapil

Excerpts from Juan L. Negron's message of Fri Sep 02 00:09:16 UTC 2011:
> Are you guys sure about the ebs backed instances?
> 
> I explain ....
> 
> Currently for oneiric, I am using ami-f1448498 which is an instance store
> ami so, am I missing something here or is ensemble by "default" using
> ebs-root instances and I just changed them to instance store ones ?
> 
> If indeed I am using instance-store images that are not being backed
> anywhere, it would be helpful to document this somewhere so not to confuse
> users.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Juan
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Kapil Thangavelu
> <email address hidden>wrote:
> 
> > Excerpts from Dustin Kirkland's message of Thu Sep 01 22:06:02 UTC 2011:
> > > Howdy, Ensemblers!  Could anyone speak to the viability of fixing this
> > > bug, or providing a suitable workaround for 11.10?
> > >
> >
> > We won't have volume management addressed with 11.10. Currently all
> > instances
> > launched by ensemble against ec2 are using ebs backed volumes, so there is
> > some
> > notion of data persistence, just completely unexposed via ensemble.
> >
> > I'd ideally like to see a volume per unit, against environment/provider
> > level
> > volume management services [1, 2]. Ideally we could drive physical
> > installations
> > towards openstack/orchestra and utilize the volume capabilities available
> > there.
> >
> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ensemble/+bug/806241/comments/4
> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ensemble/+bug/806241/comments/5
> >
> > --
> > You received this bug notification because you are a member of
> > Canonical-SIG, which is subscribed to the bug report.
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811226
> >
> > Title:
> >  Configurable persistent backing storage
> >
> > Status in Ensemble:
> >  Confirmed
> >
> > Bug description:
> >  Following on the discussion on the mailing list, about storage:
> >   * https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ensemble/2011-July/000223.html
> >  I'm filing this bug.
> >
> >  There are many, many difference configurations and considerations, so
> >  this bug might be split into multiple bugs or blueprints.
> >
> >  At a basic level, the default deployment of most current Ensemble
> >  formulas is rather ephemeral.  Ensemble provides quite a nice way to
> >  deploy and relate services quickly and reliably.  But there is no
> >  native support for persistence.  It's up to the formula writer/user to
> >  manually configure persistent storage (EBS in the AWS case).
> >
> >  Jorge writes:
> >
> >  $ ensemble deploy --respository=examples amazon-ebs
> >  $ ensemble add-relation mysql amazon-ebs
> >
> >  I would then treat "amazon-ebs" as any other resource and set up
> >  relationships to the storage and do other things like:
> >
> >  $ ensemble snapshot  // Point in time snapshot the entire thing to S3
> >  $ ensemble backup blah   // Prompt me to snag my config and EBS stuff
> >  so I can keep it offsite.
> >  $ ensemble import blah    // Import the configs and EBS stuff back to EC2
> >
> >  Of course EBS is just one storage thing that is obvious, I'd want to
> >  be able to treat a local SAN the same way, etc. Thoughts?
> >
> > To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ensemble/+bug/811226/+subscriptions
> >
> >
>