Nachi, Thanks for bringing this up. We've been thinking a lot about handling of configurations while working on Rubick.
In my understanding, oslo.config could provide an interface to different back-ends to store configuration parameters. It could be simple centralized alternative to configuration files, like k-v store or SQL database. It also could be something complicated, like a service of its own (Configration-as-a-Service), with cross-services validation capability etc. By the way, configuration as a service was mentioned in Solum session at the last summit, which implies that such service could have more then one application. The first step to this could be abstracting a back-end in oslo.config and implementing some simplistic driver, SQL or k-v storage. This could help to outline requirements to future configuraiton service. -- Best regards, Oleg Gelbukh On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Flavio Percoco <fla...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 08/01/14 17:13 -0800, Nachi Ueno wrote: > >> Hi folks >> >> OpenStack process tend to have many config options, and many hosts. >> It is a pain to manage this tons of config options. >> To centralize this management helps operation. >> >> We can use chef or puppet kind of tools, however >> sometimes each process depends on the other processes configuration. >> For example, nova depends on neutron configuration etc >> >> My idea is to have config server in oslo.config, and let cfg.CONF get >> config from the server. >> This way has several benefits. >> >> - We can get centralized management without modification on each >> projects ( nova, neutron, etc) >> - We can provide horizon for configuration >> >> This is bp for this proposal. >> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/oslo-config-centralized >> >> I'm very appreciate any comments on this. >> > > > I've thought about this as well. I like the overall idea of having a > config server. However, I don't like the idea of having it within > oslo.config. I'd prefer oslo.config to remain a library. > > Also, I think it would be more complex than just having a server that > provides the configs. It'll need authentication like all other > services in OpenStack and perhaps even support of encryption. > > I like the idea of a config registry but as mentioned above, IMHO it's > to live under its own project. > > That's all I've got for now, > FF > > -- > @flaper87 > Flavio Percoco > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev