Stephen
Mike is right, it is mostly (possibly only?) extensions that do double
lookups. Your plan looks sensible, and definitely useful. I guess I'll
see if I can actually break it once the review is up :-) I mostly
wanted to give a heads-up - there are people who are way better at
reviewing this
Mike
Glance metadata gets used for billing tags, among things, that we
would like to stay as attached to a volume as possible, as another
example. Windows images use this - which is why cinder copies all of
the glance metadata in the first place, rather than just a bootable
flag.
Apparently
My advice is two-fold:
- No need to wait for the blueprint to be approved before submitting
a review - put a review up and let people see the details, then
respond to the discussion as necessary
- Drop into the Wednesday (16:00 UTC) IRC meeting for Cinder - most
if not all of the core team are
Well, it seems to me that the problem is the above blueprint and the code it
introduced. This is an anti-feature IMO, and probably the best solution
would be to remove the above code and go back to having a single
nova-compute managing a single vCenter cluster, not multiple ones.
Problem
Hello,
In nova logs there was not any error or TRACE. Everything looks ok
there but I probably found reason and solution of that problem. It was
probably related to bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1254320
When I apply this patch on my compute nodes I have no any new instance
with
Hi Divakar,
Can I say that the bare metal provisioning is now using kind of Parent -
Child compute mode? I was also thinking that we can use host:node to
identify a kind of Parent-Child or Hierarchy Compute. So can you please
show some difference for your Parent - Child Compute Node and bare
Per the last LBaaS meeting.
1. Please find a list of use cases.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ewl95yxAMq2fO0Z6Dz6fL-w2FScERQXQR1-mXuSINis/edit?usp=sharing
a) Please review and see if you have additional ones for the project-user
b) We can then chose 2-3 use cases to play
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Hopper, Justin justin.hop...@hp.comwrote:
Russell,
At this point the guard that Nova needs to provide around the instance
does not need to be complex. It would even suffice to keep those
instances hidden from such operations as ³nova list² when invoked by
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 10:17 PM, Joshua Hesketh
joshua.hesk...@rackspace.com wrote:
Hi Chris,
Thanks for your input.
On 4/5/14 9:56 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2014 15:16:33 +1100
Joshua Hesketh joshua.hesk...@rackspace.com wrote:
I'm moving a conversation that has begun
How do these use-cases relate to availability zones or cells, is the
assumption that the same private network is available across both? An
application owner could look to protect availability not just provide
scalability.
On 6 April 2014 07:51, Samuel Bercovici samu...@radware.com wrote:
Per the
On 04/06/2014 09:02 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Hopper, Justin justin.hop...@hp.com
mailto:justin.hop...@hp.com wrote:
Russell,
At this point the guard that Nova needs to provide around the instance
does not need to be complex. It would even
Anne,
From my understanding, Trove is due to graduate in the Juno release.
Is documentation for developers, operators and users not one of the criteria
(http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/incubation-integration-requirements)
?
* Documentation / User support
**
Hi folks,
There are two problems we should address regarding the growth and change
to the HOT specification.
First our +2/+A process for normal changes doesn't totally make sense
for hot_spec.rst. We generally have some informal bar for controversial
changes (of which changes to
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Tim Bell tim.b...@cern.ch wrote:
Anne,
From my understanding, Trove is due to graduate in the Juno release.
Is documentation for developers, operators and users not one of the
criteria (
- Original Message -
Anne,
From my understanding, Trove is due to graduate in the Juno release.
Is documentation for developers, operators and users not one of the criteria
(http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/incubation-integration-requirements)
?
Anne,
Thanks... pleased to see the documentation is in the pipeline, gaps raised with
the TC and that this is not left as an optional afterthought.
Is it planned to add something to the installation guides (as for the other
projects) such as
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Steve Gordon sgor...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
Anne,
From my understanding, Trove is due to graduate in the Juno release.
Is documentation for developers, operators and users not one of the
criteria
(
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Tim Bell tim.b...@cern.ch wrote:
Anne,
Thanks... pleased to see the documentation is in the pipeline, gaps raised
with the TC and that this is not left as an optional afterthought.
Is it planned to add something to the installation guides (as for the
My worry is that many deployers are waiting for programs to reach integrated
before looking at them in detail. When something is announced as integrated,
there is an expectation that the TC criteria are met.
When there is no installation documentation or end user CLI or dashboard
information,
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/06/2014 09:02 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Hopper, Justin justin.hop...@hp.com
mailto:justin.hop...@hp.com wrote:
Russell,
At this point the guard that Nova needs to
Timur,
sorry for missing your question.
We are switching from fuel-dev ML to openstack-dev, and will keep watching
for all Fuel-related questions.
Back to your question, you can use GET request like this:
GET /api/nodes?cluster_id=1
Following is just part of the response:
[{model: WDC
On 07/04/14 06:23, Steven Dake wrote:
Hi folks,
There are two problems we should address regarding the growth and
change to the HOT specification.
First our +2/+A process for normal changes doesn't totally make sense
for hot_spec.rst. We generally have some informal bar for
controversial
Hi all,
we had a number of discussions last week in Moscow, with participation of
guys from Russia, Ukraine and Poland.
That was a great time!! Thanks everyone who participated.
Special thanks to Przemek for great preparations, including the following:
On 05/04/14 04:47, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
Hi All,
I was wondering if the time has come to document what exactly are we
doing with tripleo-heat-templates and merge.py[1], figure out what needs
to happen to move away and raise the necessary blueprints on Heat and
TripleO side.
(merge.py is a
- Original Message -
My worry is that many deployers are waiting for programs to reach integrated
before looking at them in detail. When something is announced as integrated,
there is an expectation that the TC criteria are met.
When there is no installation documentation or end
Hi All,
I was able to get keystone notification when creating/deleting a tenant by
setting these parameters in keystone.conf:
(NOTE: the brach that I was using:
git branch -v
* (no branch) 0d83e7e Bump stable/havana next version to 2013.2.2)
)
notification_topics = Key_Notify
rpc_backend =
Adam,
I was imprecise, thank you for correcting that error.
I think the net of the statement still holds though: the Keystone token
mechanism defines a mechanism for authorization, why doesn't the heat
stack manage a token for any behavior that requires authorization?
-M
hi, How can i user use Ceilometer API in Python programs?(to show
meters,alarms,...)give some python code for example please
Sincerly,Chraiti Hachem,software engineer
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
On 07/04/14 12:52, Michael Elder wrote:
I think the net of the statement still holds though: the Keystone
token mechanism defines a mechanism for authorization, why doesn't the
heat stack manage a token for any behavior that requires authorization?
Heat does use a token, but that token is
Hi. This is a reminder mail for the servicevm IRC meeting
April 8, 2014 Tuesdays 5:00(AM)UTC-
#openstack-meeting on freenode
- status update
- details of dividing the blueprints
(Sorry I'm going to write it up from now on.)
- design summit plan
--
Isaku Yamahata isaku.yamah...@gmail.com
If Keystone is configured with an external identity provider (LDAP,
OpenID, etc), how does the creation of a new user per resource affect that
external identity source?
My suggestion is broader, but in the same spirit: Could we consider
defining an _authorization_ stack token (thanks Adam),
So far, there's been no comment from anyone working on nova, so there's
been no session proposed.
I can, of course, propose a session ... but without buy-in from the
project team it's unlikely to be accepted.
Regards,
Tom
On 01/04/14 22:44, Matt Van Winkle wrote:
So, I've been watching
It might be that this is happening because there is no clear incumbent
for the Nova PTL position. Is it ok to hold off on this until after
the outcome of the election is known?
Michael
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Tom Fifield t...@openstack.org wrote:
So far, there's been no comment from
If the timing works, that seems fine :)
Regards,
Tom
On 07/04/14 10:32, Michael Still wrote:
It might be that this is happening because there is no clear incumbent
for the Nova PTL position. Is it ok to hold off on this until after
the outcome of the election is known?
Michael
On Mon, Apr
This seems like a good place to start:
https://github.com/openstack/python-ceilometerclient/blob/master/doc/source/index.rst
Regards,
Steve Martinelli
Software Developer - Openstack
Keystone Core Member
Phone:
1-905-413-2851
E-mail: steve...@ca.ibm.com
8200 Warden Ave
Markham, ON L6G 1C7
Duncan,
Thanks for your response. Tho' i agree to what you said.. I am still
trying to understand why i see what i see .. i.e. why the base class
variables (_mount_shared) shows up empty in __del__
I am assuming here that the obj is not completely gone/deleted, so its vars
must still be in
To add:
I was looking at Nova code and it seems there is a framework for
cleanup using the terminate calls.. IIUC this works as libvirt calls
terminate on Nova instance when the VM is shutting down/destroying, hence
terminate seems to be a good place to do cleanup on Nova side.. something
On Sun, 2014-04-06 at 06:59 +, Nandavar, Divakar Padiyar wrote:
Well, it seems to me that the problem is the above blueprint and the code
it introduced. This is an anti-feature IMO, and probably the best solution
would be to remove the above code and go back to having a single
38 matches
Mail list logo
