Open Stack

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Giulio Fidente <gfidente at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/10/2017 07:06 PM, James Slagle wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Giulio Fidente <gfidente at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> splitstack though requires changes in how the *existing* openstack
>>> services are deployed and we didn't want to do that just for the purpose
>>> of integrating ceph-ansible so I still believe (3) to be a sensible
>>> compromise to provide the needed functionalities and not breaking the
>>> existing deployment logic
>>
>> We might be talking about different definitions of "splitstack", as
>> I'm not sure what changes are required for existing services. FWIW, I
>> refer to what we do in CI with multinode to be splitstack in that the
>> nodes are already provisioned and we deploy the services on those
>> nodes using the same templates that we do for a "full" stack.
>
>> Those nodes could have just as easily been provisioned with our
>> undercloud and the services deployed using 2 separate stacks, and that
>> model works just as well.
>
> true, sorry for the misuse of the term splistack; the existing
> splitstack implementation continues to work well and option (3), like
> the others, can be plugged on top of it
>
> what I had in mind was instead the "split stack" scenario described by
> Steven, where the orchestration steps are moved outside heat, this is
> what we didn't have, still don't have and can be discussed at the PTG

Ok, thanks for clarifying. So when you're saying split-stack in this
context, you imply just deploying a baremetal stack, then use whatever
tool we want (or may develop) to deploy the service configuration.


-- 
-- James Slagle
--