[openstack-dev] [Magnum] Does Bay/Baymodel name should be a required option when creating a Bay/Baymodel

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Mon Jun 1 13:54:46 UTC 2015

On 05/31/2015 05:38 PM, Jay Lau wrote:
> Just want to use ML to trigger more discussion here. There are now
> bugs/patches tracing this, but seems more discussions are needed before
> we come to a conclusion.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1453732
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/181839/
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/181837/
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/181847/
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/181843/
> IMHO, making the Bay/Baymodel name as a MUST will bring more flexibility
> to end user as Magnum also support operating Bay/Baymodel via names and
> the name might be more meaningful to end users.
> Perhaps we can borrow some iead from nova, the concept in magnum can be
> mapped to nova as following:
> 1) instance => bay
> 2) flavor => baymodel
> So I think that a solution might be as following:
> 1) Make name as a MUST for both bay/baymodel
> 2) Update magnum client to use following style for bay-create and
> baymodel-create: DO NOT add "--name" option

You should decide whether name would be unique -- either globally or 
within a tenant.

Note that Nova's instance names (the display_name model field) are *not* 
unique, neither globally nor within a tenant. I personally believe this 
was a mistake.

The decision affects your data model and constraints.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list