Hi, Summarizing the history of endpoints to make it easier to understand the timeline. Looking at the history of changes in devstack, initially we used the convention volume, volumev2 and volumev3 for endpoints pointing to different cinder API versions v1, v2 and v3[1] respectively. Overtime we removed v1 and v2[2] as their support came to end of life. The endpoint for block-storage was added around 1 year after the addition of volumev3 endpoint and both have existed in the catalog for ~7 years. From an official project name perspective, block-storage seems to be the right choice and is consistent with other OpenStack services in the endpoint catalog. From a legacy point of view, volumev<version> have been the convention followed and adopted by Cinder and other OpenStack projects. My preference would be to use block-storage endpoint if we can identify/fix all the issues associated with the change. One question which I'm unsure about is, if we plan a Cinder v4 version, would it again create this conflict of a new volumev4 endpoint? [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/devstack/commit/06c7a4404edf25b9a4d913e77d12a2... [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/devstack/commit/35cec0d7c0857d76d3ea0b52b97f2a... [3] https://opendev.org/openstack/devstack/commit/cda2cb557f7176c431d151b32bc44e... Thanks Rajat Dhasmana On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 11:19 PM Takashi Kajinami <kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
OK. Thanks for the explanation. I then probably misunderstood the impact of the change. It sounds like as long as we use appropriate SDK in a proper manner, we can look up the endpoint with official service type by legacy service type and vise versa, because of internal translation which I was not aware of.
If that is true, I agree the change has no impact unless something too hacky is made in services.
This procedure is followed in keystoneauth, openstacksdk, rust SDK/cli so no users should be affected unless they explicitly ignored official rules.
---- typed from mobile, auto-correct typos assumed ----
On Fri, Oct 4, 2024, 19:23 Artem Goncharov <artem.goncharov@gmail.com <mailto:artem.goncharov@gmail.com>> wrote:
Official procedure is described at https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-sig/guidelines/consuming-catalog.h... < https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-sig/guidelines/consuming-catalog.h...
You know the service that you want to talk to and there is a list of service types that the service supports. You follow the procedure to find
On 10/5/24 02:26, Artem Goncharov wrote: the one set by your cloud.
---- typed from mobile, auto-correct typos assumed ----
On Fri, Oct 4, 2024, 19:19 Takashi Kajinami <
kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com <mailto:kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com>> wrote:
On 10/5/24 02:03, Artem Goncharov wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2024, 18:56 Takashi Kajinami <
kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com <mailto:kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com> <mailto: kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com <mailto:kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com>>> wrote:
> > IMHO changing the default value now is not a good option
here. If we change the default value
> in tempest, nova, glance (and so on, if exists) it means
that deployment would break during upgrade
> unless users explicitly set these options to the legacy
value or update keystone endpoints to use
> the new type. > This sounds like a quite breaking change which makes
upgrade of real deployments difficult.
> > May I know if there is any clear downside of using
'volumev3' ? To be honest based on the fact that
> "volumev3" has been used as default and mentioned in docs
for very long time, I find it little valuable
> while it has big use impact. > > > > There should be no impact at all as long as keystoneauth lib
is used which implements service/version discovery.
> If services hard coded service type of cinder without
implementing discovery it is clearly a bug and must be fixed instead of sticking to keeping bugs forever what we do so often.
I'm not following this. Even if we use keystoneauth, we should
know the service type
to look up the correct endpoint from the list. Or are you saying
that we can determine
the endpoint for cinder without service_type field ?
There are number of implementations which hard-code volumev3 or
use the volumev3 as default.
https://codesearch.opendev.org/?q=volumev3&i=nope&literal=nope&files=&excludeFiles=&repos= < https://codesearch.opendev.org/?q=volumev3&i=nope&literal=nope&files=&excludeFiles=&repos=
examples:
https://opendev.org/openstack/horizon/src/branch/master/openstack_dashboard/... < https://opendev.org/openstack/horizon/src/branch/master/openstack_dashboard/...
https://opendev.org/openstack/heat/src/branch/master/heat/engine/clients/os/... < https://opendev.org/openstack/heat/src/branch/master/heat/engine/clients/os/...
https://opendev.org/openstack/ceilometer/src/branch/master/ceilometer/volume... < https://opendev.org/openstack/ceilometer/src/branch/master/ceilometer/volume...
We may be need to make these at least configurable.
> In addition to that a split between upgrade vs. new install
should be implemented (install docs should explicitly recommend proper usage while existing installations may stick to their current configuration). Moreover nothing prevents adding multiple values to the catalog and drop older ones once all consumers are updated to follow the discovery procedure.
I agree we can add multiple service types and endpoints for the
same service. However my main
concern is that not all users may be aware of the required steps
to avoid inconsistency caused by
such change of default behavior.
I can easily imagine that users upgrade their deployment and now
their services require block-storage
service type without noticing they should create that "new"
service type.
> > > > On 10/5/24 01:50, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > > ---- On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 09:48:25 -0700 Ghanshyam
Mann wrote ---
> > > ---- On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 09:12:13 -0700 Artem
Goncharov wrote ---
> > > > Hey Stephen > > > > > > > > On Friday, 4 October 2024 15:15:08 GMT+2
Stephen Finucane wrote:
> > > > > o/ > > > > > > > > > > I've proposed a series of patches to "clean
up" the service catalog that
> > > > > DevStack creates in a deployment. Currently,
DevStack creates two endpoints
> > > > > for Cinder: one called 'cinderv3' of type
'volumev3' and another called
> > > > > 'cinder' of type 'block-storage'. For example: > > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > "services": > > > > > [ > > > > > { > > > > > "name": "cinderv3", > > > > > "description": "Cinder Volume
Service V3",
> > > > > "id":
"65460706a9864e71926f13042f526aeb",
> > > > > "type": "volumev3", > > > > > "enabled": true, > > > > > "links": > > > > > { > > > > > "self": > > > > > "
" > > > > > } > > > > > }, > > > > > { > > > > > "name": "cinder", > > > > > "description": "Cinder Volume Service", > > > > > "id": "cd406a0e296d47dca1e481e992851bb2", > > > > > "type": "block-storage", > > > > > "enabled": true, > > > > > "links": > > > > > { > > > > > "self": > > > > > " http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/cd406a0e296d47dca1e481e992851bb2 < http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/cd406a0e296d47dca1e481e992851bb2> <http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/cd406a0e296d47dca1e481e992851bb2 <http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/cd406a0e296d47dca1e481e992851bb2 " > > > > > } > > > > > }, > > > > > // ... > > > > > ], > > > > > "links": > > > > > { > > > > > "next": null, > > > > > "self": " http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services < http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services> < http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services < http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services>>", > > > > > "previous": null > > > > > } > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > They both ultimately point to the same API,
http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/65460706a9864e71926f13042f526aeb < http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/65460706a9864e71926f13042f526aeb> <http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/65460706a9864e71926f13042f526aeb <http://10.0.108.50/identity/v3/services/65460706a9864e71926f13042f526aeb the Cinder v3 API, meaning one
> > > > > of these endpoints is redundant. My
assumption was 'block-storage' was the
> > > > > correct one, since that's the official
service type [1], and that 'cinder'
> > > > > was the appropriate name since it mirrors
what we use for other services
> > > > > (nova, neutron, keystone, glance, ...).
However, tkajinam raised the point
> > > > > [2] that the Install Guide currently
recommends use of the 'volumev3' type
> > > > > and that projects like Nova and Glance have
an '[cinder] catalog_info' that
> > > > > defaults to 'volumev3'. If so, is
'block-storage' really the official
> > > > > service type, or is it 'volumev3'. If it is,
should we be changing the
> > > > > Install Guide and the various config option
defaults?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Previously we had volumev2 and volumev3. Those
are both versioned aliases to
> > > > the block-storage as the official service type
name (that is what structure of
> > > > the service-types-authority claims). Now there
is no volumev2 and thus the
> > > > confusion grows. > > > > I suggest looking at the rendered json at [2]
which states:
> > > > ``` > > > > "cinder": { > > > > "aliases": [ > > > > "volumev3", > > > > "volumev2", > > > > "volume", > > > > "block-store" > > > > ], > > > > "api_reference": "
https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/ < https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/> < https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/ < https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/>>",
> > > > "project": "cinder", > > > > "service_type": "block-storage" > > > > }, > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > Catalog consumption process is in detail
described at [3]. It is insanely
> > > > complex and confusing but that is what all
tools that look at the service
> > > > catalog do. > > > > > > > > Overall: > > > > - official and unique service_type of the
cinder is block-storage
> > > > - volumev3 is an alias pointing to explicit v3
api of block-storage
> > > > - there was an "idea" that once a service
exposing multiple API versions (and
> > > > those are exposed independently with
version-suffixed service types) there is an
> > > > unversioned one pointing to the "latest"
version (therefore typically you also
> > > > find `volume` service pointing to the v3 > > > > - technically install docs should stop
suggesting registering volumev3
> > > > including project_id suffix. This is in detail
addressed by the service catalog
> > > > consumption procedure and in addition
blosk-storage v3 api has a series of
> > > > APIs without project_id. Continuing appending
project_id in the service
> > > > catalog is heavily harmful. > > > > - install docs may switch to registering
`block-storage` or `volume` instead
> > > > of volumev3 and even stop pointing it to the v3
api explicitly since version
> > > > discovery is there to figure out all the
aspects.
> > > > > > With the API version changing and just to keep
backward compatibility of devstack
> > > among tooling, we kept modifying the catalog name
in this way and ended up with more
> > > confusion. > > > > > > I agree to make the cinder catalogue also
consistent with others and name them only
> > > 'blosk-storage'. > > > > > > Tempest still uses 'volumev3' as the default
cinder service catalog, but that is something we
> > > should change as first: > > > > > > -
https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/da14e2972243e4890e3ef6889bf5a85ee8... < https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/da14e2972243e4890e3ef6889bf5a85ee8cffe39/tempest/config.py#L981> < https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/da14e2972243e4890e3ef6889bf5a85ee8... < https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/da14e2972243e4890e3ef6889bf5a85ee8...
> > > > Just saw that you already proposed that. thanks ++ > > > > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/930296 < https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/930296> < https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/930296 < https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/930296>> > > > > -gmann > > > > > > > > -gmann > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] >