Open Stack

Hi Dmitry,

> Insert required metadata into roles that relies on another roles, for
> compute it will be something like:
>
>     compute:
>         requires: controller > 1

Yeah, that's actually what I was thinking about when I wrote:

> Or should we improve it somehow so it would work for one nodes,
> and will be ignored for others?

So I'm +1 for extending our meta information with such dependencies.

Sincerely,
Igor

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Dmitriy Shulyak <dshulyak at mirantis.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Can we ignore the problem above and remove this limitation? Or should
>> we improve it somehow so it would work for one nodes, and will be
>> ignored for others?
>
> I think that this validation needs to be accomplished in a different way, we
> don't need 1 controller for the sake of 1 controller,
> 1 controller is a dependency of compute/cinder/other roles. So from my pov
> there is atleast 2 options:
>
> 1. Use tasks dependencies, and prevent deployment in case if some tasks
> relies on controller.
> But the implementation might be complicated
>
> 2. Insert required metadata into roles that relies on another roles, for
> compute it will be something like:
>    compute:
>      requires: controller > 1
> We actually have DSL for declaring such things, we just need to specify this
> requirements from other side.
>
> But in 2nd case we will still need to use tricks, like one provided by Matt,
> for certain plugins. So maybe we should spend time and do 1st.
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>