[openstack-dev] [Glare][Heat][TripleO] Heat artifact type

Randall Burt randall.burt at RACKSPACE.COM
Wed Jul 20 15:18:41 UTC 2016


FWIW, option 2 is almost required unless we plan to be able to bundle multiple environments with a single template. While having a single environment for a single template can be useful, the even *more* useful scenario (and the primary one driving the development of environments initially) is when you have options as to how a template behaves (use Trove for the backend or pop vms and software config to install a database). IMO, you'd want to de-couple environments from the templates given that multiple environment could work for the same template.
 
On Jul 20, 2016, at 8:58 AM, "Mikhail Fedosin" <mfedosin at mirantis.com>
 wrote:

> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Qiming Teng <tengqim at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 06:44:06PM +0300, Oleksii Chuprykov wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Today it was announced that Glare is ready for public review
> > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-July/099553.html So
> > we are ready to start working on integration Heat with Glare and
> > implementing a POC. After discussions with Glare team we see two design
> > options:
> >
> > 1) Create one artifact type that will contain template, nested templates
> > and environments.
> > Pros: It is easy to maintain integrity. Since artifact is immutable, we can
> > guarantee the consistency and prevent from accidentally removing of
> > dependent environment.
> > Cons: If we need to add new environments to use them with template, we need
> > to create new artifact.
> >
> > 2) Create 2 artifact types: environment and template.
> > Pros: It is easy to add new environments. You just need to create new
> > dependency from template artifact to environment one.
> > Cons: Some environment can be (mistakenly) removed, and template that have
> > dependencies on it will be in inconsistent state.
> 
> Option 2 looks more flexible to me. I'm not sure we are encouraging
> users to introduce or rely on a hard dependency from a template to an
> environment file. With that, it is still good to know whether glare
> supports the concept of 'reference' where a referenced artifact cannot
> be deleted.
> 
> Hey! 
> 
> Indeed, option 2 is more flexible, but in this case users have to manually control dependencies, which is may be hard sometimes. Also, initially Glare won't support 'hard' dependencies, this feature will be added in next version, because it requires additional discussions. For this reason I recommend option 1 and let Glare control template consistency for you, it won't allow users to break anything. 
> 
> Best,
> Mike
>  
> 
>  - Qiming
> 
> > So we want to hear your opinions and suggestions on the matter. Thanks in
> > advance!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Oleksii Chuprykov
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list