Tal Liron created ARIA-334:
------------------------------
Summary: Policy for operation execution configuration
Key: ARIA-334
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIA-334
Project: AriaTosca
Issue Type: Story
Reporter: Tal Liron
Assignee: Tal Liron
Our support for [using dependencies to configure operation
execution|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ARIATOSCA/Execution+Configuration]
solves the technical problem, but it is very cumbersome to use in large
templates.
One solution is to use YAML macros (in the {{dsl_definitions}} section of the
TOSCA template). But this is still awkward and ugly to have to insert the macro
for every operation.
The TOSCA way to do this is by policy. I suggest we support a new policy for
operation execution, while *also* lettings user override those values locally
per operation.
Here's how it can be defined in the ARIA profile:
{code}
policy_types:
aria.Operation:
derived_from: tosca.policies.Root
properties:
configuration:
type: map
entry_schema: aria.OperationConfigurationParameter
data_types:
aria.OperationConfigurationParameter:
derived_from: tosca.datatypes.Root
targets: [ tosca.nodes.Root, tosca.groups.Root ]
properties:
name:
type: string
value:
type: string
{code}
You could then use it like so:
{code}
topology_template:
policies:
ssh:
type: aria.Operation
targets: [ bono, sprout, ralf, homer, homestead, vellum ]
properties:
configuration:
ssh.user: { get_property: [ HOST, host, ssh.user ] }
ssh.password: { get_property: [ HOST, host, ssh.password ] }
ssh.address: { get_attribute: [ HOST, public_address ] }
{code}
What the above means is that for *all* operations on *all* interfaces of the
target nodes (or groups) the above configuration parameters would be
automatically applied (though local use of {{dependencies}} could override
these values).
The nice thing about this is that 1) it just needs to be defined one, and 2) it
avoids our hacky {{dependencies}} notation.
It might also make sense to add more properties to the policy for applying the
policy only to specific interfaces or even specific operations and the target
nodes. But that could possibly wait for a followup JIRA task.
Note that the above example would also require us to fix intrinsic functions.
As it stands, the parser would fail the above, because using the {{HOST}}
keyword can only be used for properties inside a node or relationship. We would
thus also need to allow for policies to use {{HOST}}, and assume it applies to
the target node.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
