[openstack-dev] [packaging][neutron] --config-dir vs. --config-file
ihrachys at redhat.com
Thu Apr 23 12:41:46 UTC 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I just realized that while RDO now has a way to configure each service
separately with user defined configuration file, there is still one
limitation - a replacement for neutron.conf that contains lots of
options that are common to all services. I think we should also add a
new config-directory that would be loaded by *all* services.
I wonder what people think about its name. I think
/etc/neutron/conf.d/common is a good fit. Comments?
On 04/13/2015 05:25 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> RDO/master (aka Delorean) moved neutron l3 agent to this
> configuration scheme, configuring l3 (and vpn) agent with
> --config-dir .
> We also provided a way to configure neutron services without ever
> touching a single configuration file from the package  where
> each service has a config-dir located under
> /etc/neutron/conf.d/<service-name> that can be populated by *.conf
> files that will be automatically read by services during startup.
> All other distributions are welcome to follow the path. Please
> don't introduce your own alternative to /etc/neutron/conf.d/...
> directory to avoid unneeded platform dependent differences in
> deployment tools.
> As for devstack, it's not really feasible to introduce such a
> change there (at least from my perspective), so it's downstream
> : https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/229162/
> Thanks, /Ihar
> On 03/13/2015 03:11 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> (I'm starting a new [packaging] tag in this mailing list to
>> reach out people who are packaging our software in distributions
>> and whatnot.)
>> Neutron vendor split  introduced situations where the set of
>> configuration files for L3/VPN agent is not stable and depends on
>> which packages are installed in the system. Specifically,
>> fwaas_driver.ini file is now shipped in neutron_fwaas tarball
>> (openstack-neutron-fwaas package in RDO), and so
>> --config-file=/etc/neutron/fwaas_driver.ini argument should be
>> passed to L3/VPN agent *only* when the new package with the file
>> is installed.
>> In devstack, we solve the problem by dynamically generating CLI
>> arguments list based on which services are configured in
>> local.conf . It's not a viable approach in proper
>> distribution packages though, where we usually hardcode arguments
>>  in our service manifests (systemd unit files, in case of
>> The immediate solution to solve the issue would be to use
>> --config-dir argument that is also provided to us by oslo.config
>> instead of --config-file, and put auxiliary files there 
>> (those may be just symbolic links to actual files).
>> I initially thought to put the directory under /etc/neutron/,
>> but then realized we may be interested in keeping it out of user
>> sight while it only references stock (upstream) configuration
>> But then a question arises: whether it's useful just for this
>> particular case? Maybe there is value in using --config-dir
>> outside of it? And in that case, maybe the approach should be
>> replicated to other services?
>> AFAIU --config-dir could actually be useful to configure
>> services. Now instead of messing with configuration files that
>> are shipped with packages (and handling .rpmnew files  that
>> are generated on upgrade when local changes to those files are
>> detected), users (or deployment/installation tools) could instead
>> drop a *.conf file in that configuration directory, being sure
>> their stock configuration file is always current, and no .rpmnew
>> files are there to manually solve conflicts).
>> We can also use two --config-dir arguments, one for
>> stock/upstream configuration files, located out of /etc/neutron/,
>> and another one available for population with user configuration
>> files, under /etc/neutron/. This is similar to how we put
>> settings considered to be 'sane distro defaults' in
>> neutron-dist.conf file that is not available for modification
>> Of course users would still be able to set up their deployment
>> the old way. In that case, nothing will change for them. So the
>> approach is backwards compatible.
>> I wonder whether the idea seems reasonable and actually useful
>> for people. If so, we may want to come up with some packaging
>> standards (on where to put those config-dir(s), how to name
>> them, how to maintain symbolic links inside them) to avoid more
>> work for deployment tools.
> : https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/218562/
>> Regards, /Ihar
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the OpenStack-dev