Open Stack

Hey everyone,

Spec for the HA guide is now available to review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/408558/ 

Thanks!

Alex

On 12/8/16, 12:16 AM, "Andrew Beekhof" <abeekhof at redhat.com> wrote:

    On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Alexandra Settle <a.settle at outlook.com> wrote:
    > Thanks guys ☺
    >
    > Andrew – I think it would be highly beneficial if you could detail your thoughts in a specification so the whole community can see. I can definitely offer my time to help you work on this. Perhaps we could sync up one (my morning/your afternoon) time and get it out and ready? I can’t imagine the whole process would take longer than an hour.
    
    Sounds good. I'll try and catch you on IRC around 09:30 UTC today if
    thats convenient
    
    >
    > That way we can get some feedback on the proposal, and we can have some direction for end of Ocata/beginning of Pike.
    >
    > On 12/7/16, 1:45 AM, "Andrew Beekhof" <abeekhof at redhat.com> wrote:
    >
    >     On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Adam Spiers <aspiers at suse.com> wrote:
    >
    >     > Anyway, big thanks to Alex for her recent reviews (which are high on
    >     > my TODO list once my current emergency is dealt with), and also +1 to
    >     > most of what Andrew proposed.  The only bit I think is premature with
    >     > regards to paring things down would be removing the description of
    >     > controlling OpenStack's active/active services (e.g. APIs) via
    >     > Pacemaker:
    >     >
    >     > On 12/6/16, 3:53 AM, "Andrew Beekhof" <abeekhof at redhat.com> wrote:
    >     >> Most OpenStack services no longer need any hand-holding from a
    >     >> cluster manager and don't need to be covered
    >     >
    >     > Even though I agree with most of the details of the next-generation
    >     > architecture Andrew is proposing (and I've had many worthwhile
    >     > discussions with him on it), I believe there are still plenty of
    >     > scenarios in which it's still valid to have these services managed by
    >     > Pacemaker.  So I'd prefer to keep that stuff covered by the guide
    >     > until such a point that the next-generation architecture is widely
    >     > adopted and well proven.
    >
    >     Nod, we've talked about that in the past and I agree.
    >
    >     What I was intending to convey was that I don't think we need to spend
    >     much time on them, certainly not a chapter or section each.
    >     Probably a single "If you want the cluster to manage OpenStack
    >     services" section with a short description and command listing would
    >     be sufficient.
    >     Maybe as a peer to a section on how nagios or similar might fit into
    >     the architecture.
    >
    >     The biggest thing to decide for that section is OCF vs. systemd agents.
    >
    >