Hi,
Just a reminder that we have a list of proposed features to move into or
out of the V3 API core.
https://etherpad.openstack.org/NovaV3APICore
If you at all care about what is core and what isn't please have a look and
vote +1/-1 along with your name.
Anything that doesn't have a -1 next to
On 06/19/2013 09:39 PM, Abhishek Chanda wrote:
Hi all,
Is there an official guide to migrate nova network plugins to quantum
plugins (or rather, neutron plugins)?
Hi,
Sadly we have not made much progress with this. There are a number of
issues to consider when moving from traditional nova
You had me going there for a minute, Jay!
-- dims
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/20/2013 12:09 AM, Jorge Williams wrote:
There was a presentation by Pete Johnson in the San Diego summit about
what we're missing in OpenStack for enterprises and
Hello!
I'm writing to suggest that git-review requires to be covered by tests.
There are no testing part in it at all, so maybe it is a good idea to cover
it.
There are two types of tests to be implemented to cover the project:
* unit tests to verify working of the separated methods
* integrated
Hi community,
Here's a question.
Currently Health monitors in Loadbalancer service are made in such way that
health monitor itself is a global shared database object.
If user wants to add health monitor to a pool, it adds association between
pool and health monitor.
In order to update existing
Mark Washenberger wrote:
This sounds like a fantastic improvement. I'd really like to have a
next milestone as well as an Ongoing milestone, for tracking the
kinds of long, drawn out refactorings / code improvements that cannot
fit in a single milestone but still need to be communicated to
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 07:21 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
The following patch review came into Tempest yesterday to stop checking
for specific 20x codes on a number of Swift API -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33689/
The official documentation for these APIs says the following -
Hi,
I agree with this.
We are facing challenges when the global health pool is changed to atomically
modify all the groups that are linked to this health check as the groups might
be configured in different devices.
So if one of the group modification fails it is very difficult to revert the
Hello, I created a blueprint for the implementation of:
A tool for pinning automatically each running virtual CPU to a physical
one in the most efficient way, balancing load across sockets/cores and
maximizing cache sharing/minimizing cache misses. Ideally able to be run
on-demand, as a periodic
It's a bug, this is the code in pbr that references it:
https://github.com/openstack-dev/pbr/blob/master/pbr/packaging.py#L304
Good catch.
I've opened bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/quantum/+bug/1192987 .
Thanks,
MATT RIEDEMANN
Advisory Software Engineer
Cloud Solutions and OpenStack
On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:34 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Just wondering what people thought about how necessary it is to keep XML
support for the Nova v3 API, given that if we want to drop it doing so during
the v2-v3 transition is pretty much the ideal time to do so.
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 10:04 +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Just wondering what people thought about how necessary it is to keep
XML support for the Nova v3 API, given that if we want to drop it
doing so during the v2-v3 transition is pretty much the ideal time to
do so.
The current plan is
On 06/20/2013 11:20 AM, Brian Elliott wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:34 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Just wondering what people thought about how necessary it is to keep XML
support for the Nova v3 API, given that if we want to drop it doing so
during the v2-v3
Perfect.
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
Mark Washenberger wrote:
This sounds like a fantastic improvement. I'd really like to have a
next milestone as well as an Ongoing milestone, for tracking the
kinds of long, drawn out refactorings / code
Folks,
Is anyone having troubles running the units tests locally on a clean venv
with both run-tests.sh and tox?
I found out that this is relevant to the issue I am seeing:
https://answers.launchpad.net/quantum/+question/230219
I cannot go past the ML2 unit tests, namely only 1900~ tests run,
On 06/20/2013 12:00 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Just wondering what people thought about how necessary it is to keep XML
support for the Nova v3 API, given that if we want to drop it doing so
during the v2-v3 transition is pretty much the ideal time to do so.
Although
Hi,
I have had some discussions about if I should add a config flag in this change:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/32760/
I am looking to support adding a large amount of ephemeral disk space
to a VM, but the VHD format has a limit of around 2TB per disk. To
work around this in XenServer, I
We spoke about some nice validation frameworks at the summit, and here
and there.
Could we get away with XML-JSON then validate the JSON request (and
assume XML parse error also means bad request)?
John
On 20 June 2013 17:44, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/20/2013 12:00 PM,
Developers,
So far in Networking (formerly Quantum) IPs are pre-allocated when a new
port is created by the following def:
_allocate_ips_for_port(self, context, network, port):
If we are using a real DHCP (not the dnsmasq process) that does not accept
static IP allocation because it only
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/20/2013 11:20 AM, Brian Elliott wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:34 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Just wondering what people thought about how necessary it is to keep
XML support for the
Previously discussed:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-May/008436.html
tl;dr Don't do any of that!
-Dolph
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Frittoli, Andrea (Cloud Services)
fritt...@hp.com wrote:
Hi folks,
** **
While reviewing nova v3 tests, I realized that
Hi all,
The [state-management] project team holds a weekly meeting in
#openstack-meeting on thursdays, 2000 UTC. The next meeting is today, June
20!!! (sorry this was late in coming out)
As usual, everyone is welcome :-)
Link: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/StateManagement
##
Agreed, never said anything was intentional and I understand that, things
just evolve and that¹s how it works.
But instead of further diverging (2 things in oslo) it seems better to
organize and work together instead of against right?
Maybe taskflow can help make that possible, maybe it can't,
On 6/20/13 4:21 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
The following patch review came into Tempest yesterday to stop checking
for specific 20x codes on a number of Swift API -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33689/
The official documentation for these APIs says the following -
I may spend some time on this subject, so please share your script if you
can so that I can look through it and see what can be done to provide some
automated gating.
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2013-06-20 15:56:22 +0400 (+0400), Dina Belova
There are lots of nice things we could do, given time and people. But
the reality is that relatively few people are actually working on the
API code, documentation, tooling around it.
I would much rather have us deliver a world class JSON API with
validation and schema and comprehensive
There's work under way to make IP allocation pluggable. One of the options will
include not having an allocator for a subnet.
mark
On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Edgar Magana emag...@plumgrid.com wrote:
Developers,
So far in Networking (formerly Quantum) IPs are pre-allocated when a new port
1) I’m really not sure how that will solve the original issue (Token table
size increase). Of course we can have a job to remove the expired token.
2) We really have to think how the other services are using keystone.
Keystone “createToken” volume is going to increase. Fixing one
Could it be possible to add a flag to disable the allocation for the IP?
If the no allocation flag is enabled, all ports will have an empty value
for IPs.
It will increase the config parameters in quantum, should we try it?
Edgar
From: Mark McClain mark.mccl...@dreamhost.com
Reply-To:
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 16:02 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
There are lots of nice things we could do, given time and people. But
the reality is that relatively few people are actually working on the
API code, documentation, tooling around it.
I would much rather have us deliver a world class
Hi Melanie,
Looking at the security groups extensions I think that it will after all be
necessary to port part of the extension from V2.
The management of security groups can be handled through the
project-formerly-known-as-quantum, but the (dis)association of security
groups to instances does I
On Jun 20, 2013, at 5:36 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
The management of security groups can be handled through the
project-formerly-known-as-quantum, but the (dis)association of security
groups to instances does I think need to be handled by Nova. So we'll need
the
So anyway, let's get back to the topic this thread was discussing
about - passing meta data into provider stacks.
It seems that we have all reached an agreement that deletepolicy and
updatepolicy will be passed as params, and metadata will be exposed to
provider templates through a
33 matches
Mail list logo
