Open Stack

Hi,

So this email is relevant to my interests as an operator. =)

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Lance Bragstad <lbragstad at gmail.com> wrote:

> *The future of the templated catalog backend*
>
> Some issues were uncovered, or just resurfaced, with the templated catalog
> backend. The net of the discussion boiled down to - do we fix it or remove
> it? The answer actually ended up being both. It was determined that instead
> of trying to maintain and fix the existing templated backend, we should
> deprecate it for removal [0]. Since it does provide some value, it was
> suggested that we can start implementing a new backend based on YAML to
> fill the purpose instead. The advantage here is that the approach is
> directed towards a specific format (YAML). This should hopefully make
> things easier for both developers and users.
>
> [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/482714/​
>

We have been exclusively using the templated catalog backend for at least 5
years without any major issues. And it looks like we are now among the < 3%
using templated according to the April 2017 user survey.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

We choose the templated catalog backend for its simplicity (especially with
our CMS) and because it makes no sense (to me) to use and rely on an
SQL server to serve what is essentially static content
​.​


Regarding the v3 catalog support, we do have an in-house fix we intended to
upstream
​ very soon (and just did right now)​
. [1]


So if the templated catalog backend gets deprecated,
​my wish would be to have access to
 a
​n alternate​
​ file based
​ implementation​, a production grade implementation
 ready to be used
​ before I get spammed with deprecation warnings in the keystone logs.

Thanks

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/482766/

--
Mathieu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170711/1800528c/attachment.html>