[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-381?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13872272#comment-13872272
]
Ignasi Barrera commented on JCLOUDS-381:
----------------------------------------
I just had a code example in front of me:
{code:java}
Template template = compute.templateBuilder()
.osFamily(OsFamily.UBUNTU)
.minRam(2048)
.options(inboundPorts(22, 80)
.nodeNames(ImmutableSet.of("name1", "name2")))
.build();
compute.createNodesInGroup("jclouds", 2, template);
{code}
> Allow creating nodes through ComputeService with explicitly specified names
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCLOUDS-381
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-381
> Project: jclouds
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: jclouds-compute
> Reporter: Andrew Bayer
> Assignee: Andrew Bayer
> Fix For: 1.7.0
>
>
> Currently, instance naming for nodes created through
> ComputeService.createNodesInGroup() etc uses a combination of the specified
> group name and GroupNamingConvention's unique suffix - generally that's a
> three character random string, but for EC2 it's the id string for the
> instance. While this is fine for many cases where the instance name doesn't
> need to be referenced directly by actual humans, say, it's a pain for those
> cases. Currently, you can work around this by creating instances through the
> per-api/provider clients/apis, or through some hacks for single instance
> creation through ComputeService utilizing provider-specific TemplateOptions
> classes, but there's no generalized way to get real control over the names
> given to instances through ComputeService. This should be possible.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)
