On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 04:09:07PM -0700, Dan Smith wrote: > > Conductors will always need to talk to the database. APIs may not need > > to talk to the database. I think we can just roll conductor > > upgrades through, and then update ironic-api after that. This should > > just work, as long as we're very careful about schema changes (this is > > where the expand/contract thing comes into play). Different versions of > > conductors are only a problem if the database schema is not compatible > > with one of the versions. > > Yep, this seems like it's probably the right approach, assuming that > your API depending on RPC is still reasonable, performance-wise. It > might be confusing for people to hear that ironic's conductor goes last, > but nova's goes first. In reality, it was probably not a great idea to > have these named the same thing as they're not very similar, but oh well.
Sorry, if it wasn't clear, I said conductor should go first here, and then API... // jim __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
