On 08/10/2014 10:36 PM, Jay Lau wrote:
I was asking this because I got a -2 for
https://review.openstack.org/109505 , just want to know why this new
term metadetails was invented when we already have details,
metadata, system_metadata, instance_metadata, and properties (on
images and volumes).
As the person who -2'd the review, I'm thankful you raised this issue on
the ML, Jay. Much appreciated.
The metadetails term isn't being invented in this patch, of course. I
originally complained about the difference when this was being added:
On 08/11/2014 11:06 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
As the person who -2'd the review, I'm thankful you raised this issue on
the ML, Jay. Much appreciated.
The metadetails term isn't being invented in this patch, of course. I
originally complained about the difference when this was being added:
On 8/11/14, 6:06 PM, Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote:
As the person who -2'd the review, I'm thankful you raised this issue on
the ML, Jay. Much appreciated.
The metadetails term isn't being invented in this patch, of course. I
originally complained about the difference when this was
Le 11/08/2014 18:03, Gary Kotton a écrit :
On 8/11/14, 6:06 PM, Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote:
As the person who -2'd the review, I'm thankful you raised this issue on
the ML, Jay. Much appreciated.
The metadetails term isn't being invented in this patch, of course. I
originally
On 08/11/2014 05:58 PM, Jay Lau wrote:
I think the metadata in server group is an important feature and it
might be used by
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/soft-affinity-for-server-group
Actually, we are now doing an internal development for above bp and want
to contribute this back
Thanks Jay Pipes! I see, but setting metadata for server group might be
more flexible to handle all of the policy cases, such as hard
affinity/anti-affinity, soft affinity/anti-affinity, topology
affinity/anti-affinity etc, we may have more use cases in future related to
server group metadata.
Hi,
Does anyone know why in instance_group.py, why do we have the following
logic for transferring metadetails to metadata? Why not transfer metadata
directly from client?
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/instance_group.py#L99-L101
--
Thanks,
Jay
I was asking this because I got a -2 for
https://review.openstack.org/109505 , just want to know why this new term
metadetails was invented when we already have details, metadata,
system_metadata, instance_metadata, and properties (on images and
volumes).
Thanks!
2014-08-11 10:09 GMT+08:00 Jay
