[openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO/Ansible PTG session

Flavio Percoco flavio at redhat.com
Mon Sep 25 15:18:22 UTC 2017

>>> - The ceph-ansible implementation done in Pike could be reworked to
>>> use this model. "config download" could generate playbooks that have
>>> hooks for calling external playbooks, or those hooks could be
>>> represented in the templates directly. The result would be the same
>>> either way though in that Heat would no longer be triggering a
>>> separate Mistral workflow just for ceph-ansible.
>> I'd say for ceph-ansible, kubernetes and in general anything else which
>> needs to run with a standard playbook installed on the undercloud and
>> not one generated via the heat templates... these "external" services
>> usually require the inventory file to be in different format, to
>> describe the hosts to use on a per-service basis, not per-role (and I
>> mean tripleo roles here, not ansible roles obviously)
>> About that, we discussed a more long term vision where the playbooks
>> (static data) needd to describe how to deploy/upgrade a given service is
>> in a separate repo (like tripleo-apb) and we "compose" from heat the
>> list of playbooks to be executed based on the roles/enabled services; in
>> this scenario we'd be much closer to what we had to do for ceph-ansible
>> and I feel like that might finally allow us merge back the ceph
>> deployment (or kubernetes deployment) process into the more general
>> approach driven by tripleo
>> James, Dan, comments?
>Agreed, I think this is the longer term plan in regards to using
>APB's, where everything consumed is an external playbook/role.
>We definitely want to consider this plan in parallel with the POC work
>that Flavio is pulling together and make sure that they are aligned so
>that we're not constantly reworking the framework.
>I've not yet had a chance to review the material he sent out this
>morning, but perhaps we could work together to update the sequence
>diagram to also have a "future" state to indicate where we are going
>and what it would look like with APB's and external paybooks.

So far, I think it aligns just fine. I would like to start playing with it and
see if I can leaverage this work directly instead of modifying the existing
templates we use for paunch.

Will look into the details of how this works and get back to you,

Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 862 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170925/337e9678/attachment.sig>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list