Open Stack

Great! There is already a patch from Lajos [1]. I'd like
resource_provider_aggregates_client to be added too.
(/resource_providers/{uuid}/aggregates)

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622316/

On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 1:32 PM Chris Dent <cdent+os at anticdent.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Dan Smith wrote:
>
> >> On 12/04/2018 06:13 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
> >>> Existing Tempests tests that do things like launching, resizing,
> >>> migrating servers already touch placement so may be sufficient. If
> >>> we wanted to make these more complete adding verification of
> >>> resource providers and their inventories before and after the tests
> >>> might be useful.
>
> [snip]
>
> > I don't disagree either. However, I do think that there are cases where
> > it may make sense to be _able_ to hit the placement endpoint from
> > tempest in order to verify that certain things are happening, even in a
> > scenario that involves other services.
>
> [snip]
>
> Based on conversation with Dan in IRC, we decided it might be useful
> to clarify that Dan and I are in agreement. It had seemed to me that
> he was saying something different from me, but we're both basically
> saying "yes, tempest needs to be able to talk to placement to
> confirm what it's holding because that's useful sometimes" and "no,
> tempest doesn't need to verify the workings of placement api itself".
>
> Which boils out to this:
>
> > I *think* that gmann's
> > question in the email was actually about placement endpoint support,
> > which is the former, and I think is probably legit.
>
> Yes.
>
> --
> Chris Dent                       ٩◔̯◔۶           https://anticdent.org/
> freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20181204/891e0316/attachment-0001.html>