Bug 1367612 - [Docs][RFE][Director] Document generic node deployment - hardware provisioning phase
Summary: [Docs][RFE][Director] Document generic node deployment - hardware provisionin...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenStack
Classification: Red Hat
Component: documentation
Version: 10.0 (Newton)
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: 10.0 (Newton)
Assignee: Dan Macpherson
QA Contact: Don Domingo
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 1337783
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-08-17 01:49 UTC by Emilien Macchi
Modified: 2017-01-17 16:22 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-01-17 16:22:21 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Emilien Macchi 2016-08-17 01:49:20 UTC
Description of problem:
Document Generic node deployment - hardware provisioning phase (split stack - part1) in Tripleo.

Comment 2 Dan Macpherson 2016-11-28 05:41:32 UTC
Hi Emilien,

What kind of documentation requirements are needed for this BZ. Is the case of deploying a Generic node simply a matter of creating a "generic" role with no services (or possibly a minimal number of kernel-related services)?

- Dan

Comment 3 Emilien Macchi 2016-11-29 15:44:25 UTC
Yes, from my understanding this is about: Split Stack phase 1: the ability to deploy baremetal nodes and not deploy any software configuration on those nodes.

Comment 4 Steven Hardy 2016-11-29 15:56:48 UTC
Yes Dan, I think this is about defining a roles_data without any services, such that folks might reasonably configure them with some other tool.

So it's probably going to be something like

cp /usr/share/openstack-tripleo-heat-templates/roles_data.yaml my_roles_data.yaml
<edit my_roles_data.yaml to make the Services lists empty>
openstack overcloud deploy --templates -r my_roles_data.yaml

There will still be some hieradata written to the nodes, and we'll still configure networking, but otherwise they will be unconfigured.

Comment 5 Dan Macpherson 2016-11-30 14:43:37 UTC
Thanks, Emilien and Steve. I've put some content for this item:

https://doc-stage.usersys.redhat.com/documentation/en/red-hat-openstack-platform/10-Beta/single/advanced-overcloud-customization/#example_5_generic_node_with_no_services

Any chance you guys could take a look and provide feedback?

Also, I tested this out and found a little "gotcha" -- you need to omit the `ServicesDefault` parameter completely -- not just have a blank list. If you leave an empty `ServicesDefault` param, it throws up an error:

ERROR: Failed to validate: : resources.GenericServiceChain: : The Resource Type (None) could not be found.

Comment 7 Emilien Macchi 2016-11-30 15:16:37 UTC
It looks good to me. Only thing is "any OpenStack services configured", we don't install any service on it (OpenStack or not OpenStack). Otherwise it's good to me.

Comment 8 Dan Macpherson 2016-11-30 16:01:16 UTC
(In reply to Emilien Macchi from comment #7)
> It looks good to me. Only thing is "any OpenStack services configured", we
> don't install any service on it (OpenStack or not OpenStack). Otherwise it's
> good to me.

Yeah, I worded it like this on purpose since this overcloud-full image has the OpenStack components pre-installed.

Comment 9 Dan Macpherson 2016-12-01 04:35:24 UTC
@ddomingo -- this is ready for peer review.


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