[openstack-dev] [Magnum] Does Bay/Baymodel name should be a required option when creating a Bay/Baymodel
jay.lau.513 at gmail.com
Mon Jun 1 15:14:24 UTC 2015
2015-06-01 21:54 GMT+08:00 Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com>:
> 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.
>> 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.
Yes, my thinking is to enable Magnum has same behavior with nova. The name
can be managed by the end user and the end user can specify the name as
they want, it is end user's responsibility to make sure there are no
duplicate names. Actually, I think that the name do not need to be unique
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
Jay Lau (Guangya Liu)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev