I will say that if we can support an ³all in one² installation, that would be a definite plus.
So as long as there aren¹t any negative consequences, I¹d give this a +1. Thanks, - David J. Easter Product Line Manager, Mirantis From: Ryan Moe <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 at 12:28 PM To: Vladimir Kuklin <[email protected]> Cc: fuel-dev <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Fuel-dev] Combined controller and compute node What kind of side stuff are we doing and what kind of problems will it lead to? On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Vladimir Kuklin <[email protected]> wrote: > Ryan > > There could be some intersections between controller and compute node > configuration. I am still not quite sure that installing controller and > compute configs will not break anything: you will need to run tempest at > least. We are running 2 contradicting classes, which we should not. Instead, > we should split deployment into small pieces and install only nova-compute and > dependencies on the controller node. Currently, we are doing a lot if side > stuff, that can lead us to a lot of problems. > > > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Mike Scherbakov <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Great finding! >> I believe there were some minor issues, and there were no use cases for using >> all-in-one deployment. That's why we kept it as is, and didn't even bother >> fixing the issues. If we remove restriction, then it means we have to test it >> thoroughly. For this particular case, there is 95% guarantee that it will >> work just fine on one node if it works on two. >> >> So I'm +1 for removing the restriction. It will also allow us to rewrite some >> smoke tests to use single-node env to speed up Fuel CI checks. >> >> However we must keep at least system tests for distributed envs, as it is >> easy to hardcode "localhost" somewhere and we must always ensure that Fuel >> works in distributed mode. >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Ryan Moe <[email protected]> wrote: >>> What were the reasons for not allowing a node to have both the compute and >>> controller roles? In my initial testing it appears that this works fine. >>> OSTF passes, all controller functions continue working, VMs boot, etc. If >>> those original concerns are no longer valid or if they can be addressed then >>> we can remove another arbitrary restriction from Fuel. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> -Ryan >>> >>> -- >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >>> Post to : [email protected] >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mike Scherbakov >> #mihgen >> >> -- >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >> Post to : [email protected] >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > > > > -- > Yours Faithfully, > Vladimir Kuklin, > Senior Deployment Engineer, > Mirantis, Inc. > +7 (495) 640-49-04 <tel:%2B7%20%28495%29%20640-49-04> > +7 (926) 702-39-68 <tel:%2B7%20%28926%29%20702-39-68> > Skype kuklinvv > 45bk3, Vorontsovskaya Str. > Moscow, Russia, > www.mirantis.com <http://www.mirantis.ru/> > www.mirantis.ru <http://www.mirantis.ru/> > [email protected] -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
