Open Stack

hi Dan!

On 05/07/2015 04:32 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> Looking over some of the Puppet pacemaker stuff today. I appreciate all
> the hard work going into this effort but I'm not quite happy about all
> of the conditionals we are adding to our puppet overcloud_controller.pp
> manifest. Specifically it seems that every service will basically have
> its resources duplicated for pacemaker and non-pacemaker version of the
> controller by checking the $enable_pacemaker variable.

not sure about the meaning of 'resources duplicated' but I think it is 
safe to say that the pacemaker ifs are there coping mainly with the 
following two:

1. when pacemaker, we don't want puppet to enable/start the service, 
pacemaker will manage so we need to tell the module not to

2. when pacemaker, there are some pacemaker related steps to be 
performed, like adding a resource into the cluster so that it is 
effectively monitoring the service status

in the future, we might need to pass some specific config params to a 
module only when pacemaker, but that looks like covered by 1) already

> After seeing it play out for a couple services I think I might prefer it
> better if we had an entirely separate template for the "pacemaker"
> version of the controller. One easy way to kick off this effort would be
> to use the Heat resource registry to enable pacemaker rather than a
> parameter.
>
> Something like this:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/180833/
>
> If we were to split out the controller into two separate templates I
> think it might be appropriate to move a few things into puppet-tripleo
> to de-duplicate a bit. Things like the database creation for example.
> But probably not all of the services... because we are trying as much as
> possible to use the stackforge puppet modules directly (and not our own
> composition layer).

I think the change is good, I am assuming we don't want the shared parts 
to get duplicated into the two .pp though.

What is your idea about those shared parts? To move them into 
puppet-tripleo? To provision a shared .pp in addition to a 
differentiated top-level template maybe? Something else?
-- 
Giulio Fidente
GPG KEY: 08D733BA