Re: [Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: Request for feedback

[Ian Cordasco]

-Original Message-
From: Fox, Kevin M <kevin@pnnl.gov>
Reply: Fox, Kevin M <kevin@pnnl.gov>
Date: May 12, 2016 at 19:00:12
To: Matt Fischer <m...@mattfischer.com>, Flavio Percoco <fla...@redhat.com>
Cc: openstack-...@lists.openstack.org <openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>, 
openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org 
<openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
Subject:  Re: [Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: 
Request for feedback

> Is there a copy-from-url method that's not deprecated yet?
>  
> The app catalog is still pointing users at the command line in v1 mode

I'm sorry for missing something that must be obvious. What does this have to do 
with deprecating the registry?

--  
Ian Cordasco


___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: Request for feedback

[Sam Morrison]

We find glance registry quite useful. Have a central glance-registry api is 
useful when you have multiple datacenters all with glance-apis and talking back 
to a central registry service. I guess they could all talk back to the central 
DB server but currently that would be over the public Internet for us. Not 
really an issue, we can work around it.

The major thing that the registry has given us has been rolling upgrades. We 
have been able to upgrade our registry first then one by one upgrade our API 
servers (we have about 15 glance-apis) 

I don’t think we would’ve been able to do that if all the glance-apis were 
talking to the DB, (At least not in glance’s current state)

Sam




> On 12 May 2016, at 1:51 PM, Flavio Percoco  wrote:
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> The Glance team is evaluating the needs and usefulness of the Glance Registry
> service and this email is a request for feedback from the overall community
> before the team moves forward with anything.
> 
> Historically, there have been reasons to create this service. Some deployments
> use it to hide database credentials from Glance public endpoints, others use 
> it
> for scaling purposes and others because v1 depends on it. This is a good time
> for the team to re-evaluate the need of these services since v2 doesn't depend
> on it.
> 
> So, here's the big question:
> 
> Why do you think this service should be kept around?
> 
> Summit etherpad: 
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-glance-registry-deprecation
> 
> Flavio
> -- 
> @flaper87
> Flavio Percoco
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators


___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: Request for feedback

[Fox, Kevin M]

Is there a copy-from-url method that's not deprecated yet?

The app catalog is still pointing users at the command line in v1 mode

Thanks,
Kevin

From: Matt Fischer [m...@mattfischer.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 4:43 PM
To: Flavio Percoco
Cc: openstack-...@lists.openstack.org; openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: 
Request for feedback


On May 11, 2016 10:03 PM, "Flavio Percoco" 
<fla...@redhat.com<mailto:fla...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> The Glance team is evaluating the needs and usefulness of the Glance Registry
> service and this email is a request for feedback from the overall community
> before the team moves forward with anything.
>
> Historically, there have been reasons to create this service. Some deployments
> use it to hide database credentials from Glance public endpoints, others use 
> it
> for scaling purposes and others because v1 depends on it. This is a good time
> for the team to re-evaluate the need of these services since v2 doesn't depend
> on it.
>
> So, here's the big question:
>
> Why do you think this service should be kept around?

I've not seen any responses so far so wanted to just say we have no use case 
for it. I assume this also explains the silence from the rest of the ops. +1 to 
remove.
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: Request for feedback

[Matt Fischer]

On May 11, 2016 10:03 PM, "Flavio Percoco"  wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> The Glance team is evaluating the needs and usefulness of the Glance
Registry
> service and this email is a request for feedback from the overall
community
> before the team moves forward with anything.
>
> Historically, there have been reasons to create this service. Some
deployments
> use it to hide database credentials from Glance public endpoints, others
use it
> for scaling purposes and others because v1 depends on it. This is a good
time
> for the team to re-evaluate the need of these services since v2 doesn't
depend
> on it.
>
> So, here's the big question:
>
> Why do you think this service should be kept around?

I've not seen any responses so far so wanted to just say we have no use
case for it. I assume this also explains the silence from the rest of the
ops. +1 to remove.
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: Request for feedback

[Flavio Percoco]

Greetings,

The Glance team is evaluating the needs and usefulness of the Glance Registry
service and this email is a request for feedback from the overall community
before the team moves forward with anything.

Historically, there have been reasons to create this service. Some deployments
use it to hide database credentials from Glance public endpoints, others use it
for scaling purposes and others because v1 depends on it. This is a good time
for the team to re-evaluate the need of these services since v2 doesn't depend
on it.

So, here's the big question:

Why do you think this service should be kept around?

Summit etherpad: 
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-glance-registry-deprecation

Flavio
--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators