On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 05/04/2014 01:13 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
>>
>> To add some color, Swift supports both single conf files and conf.d
>> directory-based configs. See
>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/swift/deployment_guide.html#general-service-configurati
On 05/04/2014 01:13 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
To add some color, Swift supports both single conf files and conf.d
directory-based configs. See
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/swift/deployment_guide.html#general-service-configuration.
+1
The "single config file" pattern is quite useful f
On 05/02/2014 10:09 PM, Mark McClain wrote:
> We have grown in the number of configuration files and I do think
> some of the design decisions made several years ago should probably
> be revisited. One of the drivers of multiple configuration files is
> the way that Neutron is currently packaged [
On 05/03/2014 12:48 AM, Mark T. Voelker wrote:
> I think it's not just devstack/grenade that would benefit from this.
> Variance in the plugin configuration patterns is a fairly common
> complaint I hear from folks deploying OpenStack, and going to a single
> config would likely make that easier.
External networks can be handled just like regular networks by not
specifying the external bridge. They will then be tagged with the provider
network information just like any other tenant network.
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:52 PM, gustavo panizzo wrote:
> On 05/04/2014 01:22 PM, Mark McClain wro
On 05/04/2014 01:22 PM, Mark McClain wrote:
>
>
>> On May 4, 2014, at 8:08, "Sean Dague" wrote:
>>
>> Question (because I honestly don't know), when would you want more than
>> 1 l3 agent running on the same box?
>
> For the legacy case where there are multiple external networks connected to a
I second the conf.d model.
Regards,
Mandeep
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 10:13 AM, John Dickinson wrote:
> To add some color, Swift supports both single conf files and conf.d
> directory-based configs. See
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/swift/deployment_guide.html#general-service-configuratio
To add some color, Swift supports both single conf files and conf.d
directory-based configs. See
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/swift/deployment_guide.html#general-service-configuration.
The "single config file" pattern is quite useful for simpler configurations,
but the directory-based on
If the consensus is to unify all the config options into a single
configuration file, I'd suggest following what the Nova folks did with
[1], which I think is what Salvatore was also hinted. This will also
help mitigate needless source code conflicts that would inevitably
arise when merging competi
> On May 4, 2014, at 8:08, "Sean Dague" wrote:
>
> Question (because I honestly don't know), when would you want more than
> 1 l3 agent running on the same box?
For the legacy case where there are multiple external networks connected to a
node on different bridges.
___
On 05/03/2014 03:53 PM, gustavo panizzo wrote:
> On 05/02/2014 11:09 AM, Mark McClain wrote:
>>
>> To throw something out, what if moved to using config-dir for optional
>> configs since it would still support plugin scoped configuration files.
>>
>> Neutron Servers/Network Nodes
>> /etc/neutro
On 05/02/2014 11:09 AM, Mark McClain wrote:
>
> To throw something out, what if moved to using config-dir for optional
> configs since it would still support plugin scoped configuration files.
>
> Neutron Servers/Network Nodes
> /etc/neutron.d
> neutron.conf (Common Options)
> ser
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 08:18:18AM -0500, Kyle Mestery wrote:
> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> > Some non insignificant number of devstack changes related to neutron
> > seem to be neutron plugins having to do all kinds of manipulation of
> > extra config files. The grenade up
On 02/05/14 22:09, Mark McClain wrote:
>
> On May 2, 2014, at 7:39 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>
>> Some non insignificant number of devstack changes related to neutron
>> seem to be neutron plugins having to do all kinds of manipulation of
>> extra config files. The grenade upgrade issue in neutron w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
+1 for making single config the norm
I think it's not just devstack/grenade that would benefit from this.
Variance in the plugin configuration patterns is a fairly common
complaint I hear from folks deploying OpenStack, and going to a single
config wo
Technically we don't need anything in neutron to migrate to a single config
files if not rearrange files in ./etc
For devstack, iniset calls to plugin-specific configuration files should
then be adjusted accordingly.
I think we started with plugin specific configuration files because at that
time i
On May 2, 2014, at 7:39 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> Some non insignificant number of devstack changes related to neutron
> seem to be neutron plugins having to do all kinds of manipulation of
> extra config files. The grenade upgrade issue in neutron was because of
> some placement change on config
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> Some non insignificant number of devstack changes related to neutron
> seem to be neutron plugins having to do all kinds of manipulation of
> extra config files. The grenade upgrade issue in neutron was because of
> some placement change on confi
Some non insignificant number of devstack changes related to neutron
seem to be neutron plugins having to do all kinds of manipulation of
extra config files. The grenade upgrade issue in neutron was because of
some placement change on config files. Neutron seems to have *a ton* of
config files and
19 matches
Mail list logo
