Hi Jay, 2016-11-13 3:12 GMT+09:00 Jay Pipes <[email protected]>: > On 11/12/2016 09:31 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: >> >> Hi Stackers, >> >> In TripleO, Ironic provides physical servers for an OpenStack >> deployment but we have to configure physical storages manually, or >> with any tool, if required. It's better that an OpenStack service >> manages physical storages as same as Ironic for servers. >> >> IMO, there are 2 plans to manage physical storages: > > When you say "manage physical storage" are you referring to configuring > something like Ceph or GlusterFS or even NFS on a bunch of baremetal > servers?
No. "physical storages" means storage products like EMC VNX, NetApp Data ONTAP, HPE Lefthand and so on. Say there is a new service named X to manage them. A user, he/she will be a new IaaS admin, requests many baremetal servers to Ironic and some baremetal storages to X. After they are provided, he/she will start to build a new OpenStack deployment with them. Nova in the new one will provide VMs on the servers and Cinder will manage logical volumes on the storages. X doesn't manage each logical volume but pools, user accounts and network connections of the storages. BR, Akira > That isn't a multi-tenant HTTP API service designed for lots of users but > rather a need to automate some mostly one-time storage setup actions. > > If so, I think that is more the realm of configuration management systems > like Puppet or Ansible than OpenStack itself. > > Best, > -jay > >> a) extends Ironic >> b) creates a new service >> >> Which is better? Any ideas? >> >> Thank you, >> Akira __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
