Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Feat: bootstrap services cinder - #318
Conversation
larryrensing
commented
Apr 6, 2017
After thinking about it for a while and bouncing some ideas off others, is this something we really want for a service like cinder? With the work @wilkers-steve is doing here, this bootstrapping job would fail if LVM is enabled with ceph disabled. These bootstrapping jobs should be idempotent regardless of what configurations have been made under the hood. I think cinder is too much of a snowflake to be able to bootstrap with confidence. Thoughts @alanmeadows@intlabs@wilkers-steve@v1k0d3n ? |
With this implementation, I'm inclined to agree with @larryrensing. It would, however, be possible to get the enabled backends from |
wilkers-steve
commented
Apr 6, 2017
Thanks for working this @jeffaugustine. I agree with @larryrensing and @intlabs that we should reevaluate how we're bootstrapping volume types for cinder. One of the necessary additions for bootstrapping will require polling whether a resource has been successfully created and has a status of |
v1k0d3n
commented
Apr 6, 2017
i'm in favor of waiting until openstack @jeffaugustine. this will give you some breathing room (you don't have to feel rushed), and allow the team to really discuss it further. +1 to @wilkers-steve |
jeffaugustine
commented
Apr 7, 2017
Alright. I'll close for now with intent to reintroduce once everything is moved over, using a more dynamic approach to choosing what volume type(s) is created. |
What is the purpose of this pull request?:
Initialize Cinder with a volume type
What issue does this pull request address?:
partial fix for #201
Notes for reviewers to consider:
Specific reviewers for pull request:
@larryrensing@intlabs