Hi all,
I configure keystone with ldap backend followed LDAP section of
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/keystone/configuration.html,
and when I create tenant in ldap, I got the error about enable and
desc attribute type undefined in keystone.log.
Here is keystone.conf:
I agree with the below from a XenServer perspective. As with vmware, XenServer
supports live snapshotting and creating multiple clones from that live snapshot.
I understand that there is a XenAPI equivalent in the works and therefore would
argue the API changes need to be accepted as a
On 20/08/13 00:15 -0700, Mark Washenberger wrote:
2) I highly caution folks who think a No-SQL store is a good storage
solution for any of the data currently used by Nova, Glance (registry),
Cinder (registry), Ceilometer, and Quantum. All of the data stored and
On Thu, 2013-08-15 at 14:12 +1200, Robert Collins wrote:
This may interest data-driven types here.
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/
Note specifically the citation of 200-400 lines as the knee of the review
effectiveness curve: that's
Is there a downside to having it? A positive is it gives a snapshot of
everything for each release.
I'm not at fan of having a snapshot of the Hadoop swift patches compiled
into a jar and stored in the repository. I'd prefer that it is hosted
elsewhere.
Best,
matt
On 08/19/2013 04:37 PM,
Was the original reasoning to use StrongSwan over OpenSwan, only because of
community support? I vaguely recall something mentioned about StrongSwan having
additional capabilities or something. Can anyone confirm?
As far as which option, it sounds like B or C-2 are the better choices, just
On 8/19/13 8:21 AM, Sandy Walsh sandy.wa...@rackspace.com wrote:
On 08/18/2013 04:04 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/17/2013 03:10 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16 2013, Jay Pipes wrote:
Actually, that's the opposite of what I'm suggesting :) I'm suggesting
getting rid of the
*sigh* I wish I'd been aware of these conversations and been in the
Grizzly summit session on soft delete...
What specific unique constraint was needed that changing the deleted
column to use the id value solved?
-jay
On 08/19/2013 03:56 AM, Chris Behrens wrote:
'deleted' is used so that
The script is stupid. If my name isn't on the list of reviewers, sometimes it
fails to catch the patch. I'll add myself to these.
# Shawn Hartsock
- Original Message -
From: Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com
To: Shawn Hartsock hartso...@vmware.com, openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
The patch in question (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28232/24) adds
the ability to track quota usage on a per user basis within a project.
I have run into two issues with it so far: the db migration is
incomplete and leaves the data in a bad state, and the sync methods used
during quota
On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 11:26 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2013-08-15 at 14:12 +1200, Robert Collins wrote:
This may interest data-driven types here.
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/
Note specifically the citation of
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 04:02:12PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 11:26 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2013-08-15 at 14:12 +1200, Robert Collins wrote:
This may interest data-driven types here.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
There are a couple of things that would worry me about an hypothetic
support for NoSQL but I guess one that I'd consider very critical is
migrations. Some could argue asking whether we'd really need them or
not - when talking about
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.comwrote:
In this thread about code review:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013701.html
I mentioned that I thought there were too many blueprints created without
sufficient supporting design
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:02 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 11:26 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
The full study is here:
http://support.smartbear.com/resources/cc/book/code-review-cisco-case-study.pdf
I can't find the data they based their numbers on,
Anne Gentle wrote:
- Less than 1 in 4 blueprints is created before the devel
period starts for a release.
I find this date mismatch especially intriguing, because the Foundation
and member company sponsors spend millions on Design Summits annually
and caters so much to getting
On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 14:38 -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Note that in some cases, some improvements that do not clearly fall
into the bug category are landed without a blueprint link (or a bug
link). So a first step could be to require that a review always
references a bug or a blueprint
Thanks for address the issues. About the bad state for fixed_ips,
floating_ips, i think we could make the user_id column=NULL when creating
the quota usage and reservation, so the usages for fixed_ips and
floating_ips will be synced within the project.
Does this make sense?
2013/8/20 Andrew
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 10:36:39AM -0500, Anne Gentle wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
berra...@redhat.comwrote:
The data for the last 3 releases is:
Series: folsom
Specs: 178
Specs (no URL): 144
Specs (w/ URL): 34
Specs (Early): 38
Today's Hyper-V meeting minutes:
Minutes:
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-08-20-16.06.html
Minutes (text):
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-08-20-16.06.txt
Log:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 3:20 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 20/08/13 00:15 -0700, Mark Washenberger wrote:
2) I highly caution folks who think a No-SQL store is a good
storage
solution for any of the data currently used by Nova, Glance
(registry),
On 08/21/13 at 12:02am, Yingjun Li wrote:
Thanks for address the issues. About the bad state for fixed_ips,
floating_ips, i think we could make the user_id column=NULL when creating
the quota usage and reservation, so the usages for fixed_ips and
floating_ips will be synced within the project.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 05:18:21PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:53:25PM -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Anne Gentle wrote:
- Less than 1 in 4 blueprints is created before the devel
period starts for a release.
I find this date mismatch
Without any objections, I've added Alex Gaynor to the requirements-core
team.
Welcome, Alex!
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2013-08-16 11:04:14 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
I'd like to propose Alex Gaynor for core status on the
Hi Paul
2013/8/20 Paul Michali p...@cisco.com:
Was the original reasoning to use StrongSwan over OpenSwan, only because of
community support? I vaguely recall something mentioned about StrongSwan
having additional capabilities or something. Can anyone confirm?
As far as which option, it
Ok, that’s good.
I don't think the following though would work. Maybe something else is needed?
try:
import eventlet
eventlet_on = True
except ImportError:
eventlet_on = False
Due to how oslo.db could be used the environment may actually have eventlet
installed (say a server
Mark, good thoughts (as usual)
On 08/19/2013 09:15 PM, Mark Washenberger wrote:
The goal isn't really to replace sqlalchemy completely.
Perhaps my problem is that I am not exactly sure what the goals are.
Cleanup (BL mixed in the BL seems wrong)? HA or performance (are people
hitting limits
Which release are you using?
According to my experience last year when ldap backend was much more
premature, i had to add those attributes in my ldap server's manually,
because there is no such attribute in its schema.
I don't know the status now.
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Qinglong.Meng
Hi Folks,
Now we have explicit control to limit the version of rpc methods that can be
sent, but I'm wondering what I need to do now to make the next version of a
call adding an additional parameter.
It looks like the current code is really focused on the data types being
passed, rather that
Thanks everyone, I look forward to continuing to help out!
Alex
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Doug Hellmann
doug.hellm...@dreamhost.comwrote:
Without any objections, I've added Alex Gaynor to the requirements-core
team.
Welcome, Alex!
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Jeremy Stanley
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 05:18:21PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:53:25PM -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
It would be more interesting to check how many blueprints are created
more than two weeks after the design summit. Those would be the
On 08/20/2013 01:37 PM, Day, Phil wrote:
If I want to add a parameter and bump this to version 2.36, do I just
change the version checked in can_send_version – or should there now be
specific handling for each new version:
Specific handling for each version would be ideal. We want to send the
Excerpts from Mark McLoughlin's message of 2013-08-20 03:26:01 -0700:
On Thu, 2013-08-15 at 14:12 +1200, Robert Collins wrote:
This may interest data-driven types here.
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/
Note specifically the
On 08/20/2013 10:42 AM, Thomas Maddox wrote:
On 8/19/13 8:21 AM, Sandy Walsh sandy.wa...@rackspace.com wrote:
On 08/18/2013 04:04 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/17/2013 03:10 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16 2013, Jay Pipes wrote:
Actually, that's the opposite of what I'm suggesting
Jay,
Don't worry I investigate this question very well.
There are actually two approaches:
1) Use deleted_at to create Unique Constraints.
But then we are not able to store in deleted_at NONE value, because it
won't work
e.g. We have table for Users (user_name, deleted_at, deleted), and we
On Wed, 2013-08-14 at 18:02 -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Simo Sorce wrote:
On Wed, 2013-08-14 at 14:06 -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
I explained why I prefer it to land in a few weeks rather than now...
Can someone explain why they prefer the reverse ? Why does it have to be
in havana ?
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:33 PM, Chris Behrens cbehr...@codestud.com
wrote:
For instances table, we want to make sure 'uuid' is unique. But we can't put
a unique constraint on that alone. If that instance gets deleted.. we should
be able to create another entry with the same uuid without a
I see the following use case:
1) Create something with a unique name within your tenant
2) Delete that
3) Create something with the same unique name immediately after
As a pointless and silly use case that we should not cater to.
It's made the database schema needlessly complex IMO and added
On Aug 20, 2013, at 12:51 PM, Ed Leafe e...@openstack.org wrote:
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:33 PM, Chris Behrens cbehr...@codestud.com
wrote:
For instances table, we want to make sure 'uuid' is unique. But we can't
put a unique constraint on that alone. If that instance gets deleted.. we
On Aug 20, 2013, at 1:05 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
I see the following use case:
1) Create something with a unique name within your tenant
2) Delete that
3) Create something with the same unique name immediately after
As a pointless and silly use case that we should not
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
We should take a look at look at the various entities in the various
database schemata and ask the following questions:
1) Do we care about archival of the entity?
2) Do we care about audit history of changes to the
In light of today's IRC meeting in #openstack-glance (notes in etherpad
https://etherpad.openstack.org/LG39UnQA7z), I've updated the tasks api document
and the import document:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Glance-tasks-api
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Glance-tasks-import
cheers,
On 08/20/2013 05:52 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com
mailto:thin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com
mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
We should take a look at look at the various
Very cool, would u consider trying to use taskflow for some of this. It
seems to fit (or could fit) part of the bill nicely.
I'd be up to working with you guys to make this happen, if you guys want
to discuss more u know where to find me (on IRC, ha).
On 8/20/13 2:44 PM, Brian Rosmaita
On 08/20/2013 05:52 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com
mailto:thin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com
mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
We should take a look at look at the various
On Aug 20, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/20/2013 05:52 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com
mailto:thin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com
A quick note to let everyone know that https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28892/
has merged and now means that Swift is using pbr for version numbers.
This has a couple of consequences that need to be made public:
1) In order to migrate to using pbr, we consumed the 1.9.2 version. I have
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya
vishvana...@gmail.comwrote:
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote:
For #1 and #2, really this sounds like another thing doing this along with
Ceilometer. I would really like to leave this in Ceilometer and not have
On 08/19/2013 08:27 AM, Sandy Walsh wrote:
On 08/19/2013 05:08 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Sun, Aug 18 2013, Jay Pipes wrote:
I'm proposing that in these cases, a *new* resource would be added to the
resource table (and its ID inserted in meter) table with the new
flavor/instance's
On Aug 20, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya vishvana...@gmail.com wrote:
c) is going ot take a while. There are still quite a few places in nova,
for example, that depend on accessing deleted records.
Do you have a list of these places?
No. I believe Joe Gordon did an initial look
On Aug 20, 2013, at 4:15 PM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya vishvana...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote:
For #1 and #2, really this sounds like another thing doing this along with
Joshua, thanks for reaching out. The informal consensus was that taskflow was
overkill for what we're doing in some ways, and maybe not mature enough in
others. But maybe we should reconsider (especially if you're willing to help
out!). If any Glance people aren't familiar with the current
Thx Brian,
Sounds good. I will do my best to show-up.
From looking at the commit @
https://github.com/flwang/glance/commit/f1c0a94fb7b1a829bfe1828c61abb8b2bd2
fb917#L4R265 there does seem to be quite a bit of similarity (which isn't
a bad thing, means we are just thinking on the same lines).
We've been too lax about delineating public and internal interfaces in
python-keystoneclient. This makes changes and reviews difficult because
we don't know what we can change without breaking applications. For
example, we thought we could rename a part, but then it broke somebody
(Horizon?)[0].
On 08/20/2013 09:26 PM, Brant Knudson wrote:
We've been too lax about delineating public and internal interfaces in
python-keystoneclient. This makes changes and reviews difficult because
we don't know what we can change without breaking applications. For
example, we thought we could
I like this guy; his review is really helpful for my swift patch set.
Thanks again, Alex.
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:45 AM, Alex Gaynor alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks everyone, I look forward to continuing to help out!
Alex
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Doug Hellmann
Hi,
I have seen the code about oauth in the keystone but I cannot find the
document about how to setup keystone and other openstack services to enable
oauth.
Can anyone tell me how to setup an env like this?
Thanks
Yong Sheng Gong
___
OpenStack-dev
We need your help! This is a community driven project to provide the user group
community access to OpenStack training materials. We cannot make this work
without your help. We are looking for individuals willing to commit to
contributing a page at a time. All the details are here
Hi,
Currently in openstack, the ephemeral disk is not migrated on resize. This
has the potential for data loss.
We can change the migrations to include the ephemeral disks by default.
We can have a restriction on migrating large instances by the total disk
size (root+ephemeral).
We can also
59 matches
Mail list logo
