Bug 1030069 - [RFE] packstack should allow for cinder share mount options
Summary: [RFE] packstack should allow for cinder share mount options
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenStack
Classification: Red Hat
Component: openstack-packstack
Version: 4.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: z4
: 4.0
Assignee: Gilles Dubreuil
QA Contact: yeylon@redhat.com
URL:
Whiteboard: storage
Depends On:
Blocks: 1040649 1045196
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-11-13 21:05 UTC by Steve Reichard
Modified: 2016-04-26 15:48 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-03-13 02:09:17 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Steve Reichard 2013-11-13 21:05:31 UTC
Description of problem:

I greatly appreciate packstack adding the support to configure glusterfs as a backend to cinder.

One feature to enhance it would be to allow options to be specified.

I work around this by issuing this command, since the one option I care about is backupvolfile-server.

ssh ${CONFIG_CINDER_HOST} "sed 's/^172.31.143.91:\\/OSTACKcinder\$/172.31.143.91:\\/OSTACKcinder  -o backupvolfile-server=172.31.143.92/' /etc/cinder/shares.conf"


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

[root@cvd1 site-packages]# yum list installed | grep packstack
This system is not registered to Red Hat Subscription Management. You can use subscription-manager to register.
openstack-packstack.noarch     2013.2.1-0.9.dev840.el6ost
[root@cvd1 site-packages]# 


How reproducible:



Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 3 Gilles Dubreuil 2014-03-12 02:35:03 UTC
My understanding is Packstack's scope is all-in-one deployment type, even though it can handle few other scenarios.

If that is confirmed then this RFE is not going to be honored and foreman deployment should be used. 

Effectively there is no much need for glusterfs storage in such case, well besides testing but that's not user driven.

Comment 4 Gilles Dubreuil 2014-03-13 02:09:17 UTC
Steve, 

Would it be okay to drop this from Packstack?

The target of simplifying Packstack is to make it maintainable. If we keep implementing things like this we will never make it happen.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.