Open Stack

Hi Jay,

2016-11-13 3:12 GMT+09:00 Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com>:
> On 11/12/2016 09:31 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote:
>>
>> Hi Stackers,
>>
>> In TripleO, Ironic provides physical servers for an OpenStack
>> deployment but we have to configure physical storages manually, or
>> with any tool, if required. It's better that an OpenStack service
>> manages physical storages as same as Ironic for servers.
>>
>> IMO, there are 2 plans to manage physical storages:
>
> When you say "manage physical storage" are you referring to configuring
> something like Ceph or GlusterFS or even NFS on a bunch of baremetal
> servers?

No. "physical storages" means storage products like EMC VNX, NetApp
Data ONTAP, HPE Lefthand and so on.
Say there is a new service named X to manage them. A user, he/she will
be a new IaaS admin, requests many baremetal servers to Ironic and
some baremetal storages to X. After they are provided, he/she will
start to build a new OpenStack deployment with them. Nova in the new
one will provide VMs on the servers and Cinder will manage logical
volumes on the storages. X doesn't manage each logical volume but
pools, user accounts and network connections of the storages.

BR,
Akira

> That isn't a multi-tenant HTTP API service designed for lots of users but
> rather a need to automate some mostly one-time storage setup actions.
>
> If so, I think that is more the realm of configuration management systems
> like Puppet or Ansible than OpenStack itself.
>
> Best,
> -jay
>
>> a) extends Ironic
>> b) creates a new service
>>
>> Which is better? Any ideas?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Akira