Open Stack

Did you look into setting config files in an env var? That seemed like the
best bet given that #2 is out.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 8:19 AM, Mohammed Naser <mnaser at vexxhost.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Kevin Benton <kevin at benton.pub> wrote:
> > #2 would be preferable as well just because we have so many
> guides/distros
> > mentioning the different file locations. I'm not familiar with mod_wsgi
> > enough to know if it's possible.
>
> I think you might have missed my message earlier by a few seconds,
> looks like it's not really possible :(
>
> > Another 3rd option may be to edit the oslo config constructor call when
> > using that entry point to add some well-known paths for additional config
> > files rather than only parsing 'sys.argv[1]'. For example, we could
> always
> > try to add /etc/neutron/plugin.ini to the list which we can document that
> > distros/deployment tools should always create or have a symbolic link to
> a
> > plugin-specific config (e.g. ml2_conf.ini).
> >
>
> I believe that would be the best option, I did a bit of research and I
> have the following in regards to distros:
>
> - RDO uses /etc/neutron/plugin.ini:
> https://github.com/rdo-packages/neutron-distgit/blob/
> rpm-master/neutron-server.service#L8
> - Ubuntu configures `/etc/neutron/plugins/ml2/ml2_conf.ini` in
> `/etc/neutron/default` which is why in Puppet we override that to keep
> things consistent.
> (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/neutron/2:11.0.0-0ubuntu1 --
> downloaded control files from there).
>
> I have mixed feelings about this.  I think we should add
> `/etc/neutron/plugin.ini` and advice Ubuntu packaging to change their
> default (with a plugin.ini as a symlink).  If we introduce both
> `ml2_conf.ini` and `plugin.ini`, we risk creating problems if someone
> is not using the `ml2` plugin.  Alternatively, you could load
> `plugin.ini` and fallback to `/etc/neutron/plugins/ml2/ml2_conf.ini`
> if there is nothing?  It's a hard call but it should probably be
> decided by the Neutron team in coordination with the distribution
> packagers.
>
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 7:40 AM, Mohammed Naser <mnaser at vexxhost.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Kevin Benton <kevin at benton.pub> wrote:
> >> > Yes, unfortunately I didn't make it back to the patch in time to
> adjust
> >> > devstack to dump all of the configuration into one file (instead of
> >> > /etc/neutron/neutron.conf /etc/neutron/plugins/ml2.conf etc). I did
> test
> >> > locally with my dev environment around the time that RPC server patch
> >> > went
> >> > in, but there may have been a regression since it went in since it's
> not
> >> > tested as Matt pointed out.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I've added Puppet into this because I think we would have to take a
> >> decision regarding this.  The reason behind the fact that we've always
> >> used the two configuration files is because distributions which ship
> >> packages actually provide 2 configuration files.
> >>
> >> We use a configuration resource called `neutron_plugin_ml2` which
> >> configures things always in `/etc/neutron/plugins/ml2/ml2_conf.ini`.
> >>
> >> In the case of Ubuntu/Debian based systems, we update
> >> `/etc/default/neutron-server` to point the plugin configuration to
> >> `/etc/neutron/plugin.ini` and then we ensure that the file is a
> >> symbolic link to `/etc/neutron/plugins/ml2/ml2_conf.ini`.
> >>
> >> Now, we have two options in my mind (and I am open for others):
> >>
> >> 1) Configure plugins entirely inside `neutron.conf`
> >> This option would solve our issue but introduce another one.  I
> >> believe that the order in the start commands would mean that the later
> >> configuration files (in this case, the plugin.ini) would have priority
> >> over the `neutron.conf` causing an inconsistency, I don't think this
> >> is possible.  However, we can work around this by ensuring that the
> >> plugin.ini file is empty.  However, we will be introducing service
> >> restarts for no reason with that change which can be very confusing
> >> for the user as to why configuration is moving.
> >>
> >> 2) Figure out a way to pass 'args' via WSGI?
> >> I'm not sure if this is entirely possible at all.  But, could there be
> >> a way that we can pass a list of configuration files in the mod_wsgi
> >> configuration?  This would make it the most transparent fix without
> >> having to adjust all of the configuration files and bend against the
> >> set configuration paths of the distro.
> >>
> >> I'd be more than happy to hear any other ideas regarding this
> >> solution.  I would love to implement #2 if it is somehow possible
> >> (environment variables, maybe?) but #1 would work but be very messy
> >> for operators and users.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > It appears that puppet is still spreading the config files for the
> >> > server
> >> > into multiple locations as well[1]. Does it inherit that logic from
> >> > devstack? Because that will need to be changed to push all of the
> >> > relevant
> >> > server config into one conf.
> >> >
> >> > 1.
> >> >
> >> > http://logs.openstack.org/82/500182/3/check/gate-puppet-
> openstack-integration-4-scenario004-tempest-ubuntu-
> xenial/791523c/logs/etc/neutron/plugins/
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Mohammed Naser <mnaser at vexxhost.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Mohammed Naser <mnaser at vexxhost.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Matthew Treinish
> >> >> > <mtreinish at kortar.org>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 01:47:24PM -0400, Mohammed Naser wrote:
> >> >> >>> Hi folks,
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> I've attempted to enable mod_wsgi support in our dev environment
> >> >> >>> with
> >> >> >>> Puppet however it results in a traceback.  I figured it was an
> >> >> >>> environment thing so I looked into moving the Puppet CI to test
> >> >> >>> using
> >> >> >>> mod_wsgi and it resulted in the same error.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> http://logs.openstack.org/82/500182/3/check/gate-puppet-
> openstack-integration-4-scenario004-tempest-ubuntu-
> xenial/791523c/logs/apache/neutron_wsgi_error.txt.gz
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Would anyone from the Neutron team be able to give input on this?
> >> >> >>> We'd love to add gating for Neutron deployed by mod_wsgi which
> can
> >> >> >>> help find similar issues.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Neutron never got their wsgi support working in Devstack either.
> The
> >> >> >> patch
> >> >> >> adding that: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/439191/ never
> passed
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> gate and
> >> >> >> seems to have lost the attention of the author. The wsgi support
> in
> >> >> >> neutron
> >> >> >> probably doesn't work yet, and is definitely untested. IIRC, the
> >> >> >> issue
> >> >> >> they were
> >> >> >> hitting was loading the config files. [1] I don't think I saw any
> >> >> >> progress on it
> >> >> >> after that though.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The TC goal doc [2] probably should say something about it never
> >> >> >> landing and
> >> >> >> missing pike.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That would make sense.  The release notes also state that it does
> >> >> > offer the ability to run inside mod_wsgi which can be misleading to
> >> >> > deployers (that was the main reason I thought we can start testing
> >> >> > using it):
> >> >> >
> >> >> Sigh, hit send too early.  Here is the link:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/neutron/commit/?id=
> 916bc96ee214078496b4b38e1c93f36f906ce840
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> -Matt Treinish
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> [1]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-
> June/117830.html
> >> >> >> [2]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/pike/deploy-api-
> in-wsgi.html#neutron
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> >> >> >> 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
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> >> >> 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
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> >> > 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
> >> >
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> >> 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
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> > 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
> >
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170905/d52ea9d5/attachment.html>