Open Stack

Thank you for the quick response.

On Thursday, July 24, 2014 12:51 PM, John Dickinson wrote:

> you can actually do the same today
> with the IP-based system. You can use the set_info command of
> swift-ring-builder to change the IP for existing devices and this avoids
> any rebalancing in the cluster.

Thanks for the info. 
I will check the set_info command of swift-ring-builder.

My understanding now is 
- in the FQDN case, an operator has to do DNS related operation. (no whole rebalancing)
- in the IP case, an operator has to execute swift's command. (no whole rebalancing)

I think that the point of this discussion is "swift's independency in case of failure" 
and "adding a lot of operational complexity and burden".

I think that recovery procedure in the FQDN case is common one so it is 
better to have the ability for using FQDN in addition to ip addresses.
What do you think of this?

+----------------------+----------------------+-------------------+
|                      | In the FQDN case     | In the IP case    |
+----------------------+----------------------+-------------------+
|Swift's independency  |completely independent|rely on DNS systems|
+----------------------+----------------------+-------------------+
|Operational complexity| (1)                  | (2)               |
|(recovery process)    | simple               | a bit complex     |
+----------------------+----------------------+-------------------+
|Operational complexity| DNS and Swift        | Swift only        |
|(necessary skills)    |                      |                   |
+----------------------+----------------------+-------------------+

(1) in the FQDN case, change DNS info for the node. (no swift related operation)
(2) in the IP case, execute the swift-ring-builder command on a node then copy it to 
    all related nodes.

Best Regards,
Hisashi Osanai