Hi Mike, > and listed the possible values of the status field, including "INACTIVE". > Other sources are telling me that status=INACTIVE when the health monitor > thinks the member is unhealthy, status!=INACTIVE when the health monitor > thinks the member is healthy. What's going on here?
Indeed, the code will return a server status of INACTIVE if the lbaas agent marks a member ‘DOWN’. But, nowhere can I find that it actually ever does so. My statements about the status field for lbaas/neutron came from the author of the ref lbaas driver; I’ll check with him tomorrow and see if I misunderstood. Thanks, doug From: Mike Spreitzer <mspre...@us.ibm.com<mailto:mspre...@us.ibm.com>> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 at 9:14 PM To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] health maintenance in autoscaling groups Stephen Balukoff <sbaluk...@bluebox.net<mailto:sbaluk...@bluebox.net>> wrote on 07/23/2014 09:14:35 PM: > It's probably worth pointing out that most of the Neutron LBaaS team > are spending most of our time doing a major revision to Neutron > LBaaS. How stats processing should happen has definitely been > discussed but not resolved at present-- and in any case it was > apparent to those working on the project that it has secondary > importance compared to the revision work presently underway. > > I personally would like to have queries about most objects in the > stats API to Neutron LBaaS return a dictionary or I presume you meant "of" rather than "or". > statuses for child > objects which then a UI or auto-scaling system can interpret however > it wishes. That last part makes me a little nervious. I have seen "can interpret however it wishes" mean "can not draw any useful inferences because there are no standards for that content". I presume that as the grand and glorious future arrives, it will be with due respect for backwards compatibility. In the present, I am getting what appears to be conflicting information on the status field of the responses of http://docs.openstack.org/api/openstack-network/2.0/content/GET_showMember__v2.0_pools__pool_id__members__member_id__lbaas_ext_ops_member.html Doug Wiegely wrote > ‘status’ in the neutron database is configuration/provisioning status, not > operational status and listed the possible values of the status field, including "INACTIVE". Other sources are telling me that status=INACTIVE when the health monitor thinks the member is unhealthy, status!=INACTIVE when the health monitor thinks the member is healthy. What's going on here? Thanks, Mike
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
