Open Stack

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Giulio Fidente <gfidente at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/07/2015 07:35 PM, Dan Prince wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 2015-05-07 at 17:36 +0200, Giulio Fidente wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/07/2015 03:31 PM, Dan Prince wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 2015-05-07 at 11:22 +0200, Giulio Fidente wrote:
>
>
> [...]
>
>>> on the other hand, we can very well get rid of the ifs today by
>>> deploying *with* pacemaker in single node scenario as well! we already
>>> have EnablePacemaker always set to true for dev purposes, even on single
>>> node
>>
>>
>> EnablePacemaker is set to 'false' by default. IMO it should be opt-in:
>>
>>
>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/commit/?id=1f7426a014f0f83ace4d2b3531014e22f7778b4d
>
>
> sure that param is false by default, but one can enable it and deploy with
> pacemaker on single node, and in fact many people do this for dev purposes
>
> before that change, we were even running CI on single node with pacemaker so
> as a matter of fact, one could get rid of the conditionals in the manifest
> today by just assuming there will be pacemaker

This is the direction I thought we were moving. When you deploy a
single controller, it is an HA cluster of 1. As opposed to just not
using pacemaker entirely. This is the model we did previously for HA
and I thought it worked well in that it got everyone testing and using
the same code path.

I thought the EnablePacemaker parameter was more or less a temporary
thing to get us over the initial disruption of moving things over to
pacemaker.

>
> this said, I prefer myself to leave some "air" for a (future?) non-pacemaker
> scenario, but I still wanted to point out the reason why the conditionals
> are there in the first place

-- 
-- James Slagle
--