Patch work in progress [1] but local test fails [2]. It seems to be caused by the mock_sync.
I'm still looking into it. Any help would be appreciated. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/362525 [2] http://pastebin.com/iepqxUAP On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 4:59 PM Yujun Zhang <zhangyujun+...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, Alexey. Point 1 and 3 are pretty clear. > > As for point 2, if I understand it correctly, you are suggesting to modify > the static_physical.yaml as following > > entities: > - type: switch > name: switch-1 > id: switch-1 # should be same as name > state: available > relationships: > - type: nova.host > name: host-1 > id: host-1 # should be same as name* is_source: true # entity is > `source` in this relationship > * relation_type: attached - type: switch name: switch-2 > id: switch-2 # should be same as name > * is_source: false # entity is `target` in this relationship* > relation_type: backup > > But I wonder why the static physical configuration file use a different > format from vitrage template definitions[1] > > [1] > https://github.com/openstack/vitrage/blob/master/doc/source/vitrage-template-format.rst > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 4:14 PM Weyl, Alexey (Nokia - IL) < > alexey.w...@nokia.com> wrote: > >> Hi Yujun, >> >> >> >> In order for the static_physical to work for different datasources >> without the restrictions, you need to do the following changes: >> >> Go to the static_physical transformer: >> >> 1. Remove the methods: _register_relations_direction, >> _find_relation_direction_source. >> >> 2. Add to the static_physical.yaml for each definition also a >> field for direction which will indicate the source and the destination >> between the datasources. >> >> 3. In method: _create_neighbor, remove the usage of method >> _find_relation_direction_source, and use the new definition from the yaml >> file here to decide the edge direction. >> >> >> >> Is it ok? >> >> >> >> *From:* Yujun Zhang [mailto:zhangyujun+...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, August 26, 2016 4:22 AM >> >> >> *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [vitrage] relationship_type in >> static_datasources >> >> >> >> Lost in the code...It seems the datasource just construct the entities >> and send them over event bus to entity graph processor. I need to dig >> further to find out the exact point the "backup" relationship is filtered. >> >> >> >> I think we should some how keep the validation of relationship type. It >> is so easy to make typo when creating the template manually (I did this >> quite often...). >> >> >> >> My idea is to delegate the validation to datasource instead of >> enumerating all constants it in evaluator. I think this will introduce >> better extensibility. Any comments? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 1:32 PM Weyl, Alexey (Nokia - IL) < >> alexey.w...@nokia.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Yujun, >> >> >> >> You can find the names of the lables in the constants.py file. >> >> >> >> In addition, the restriction on the physical_static datasource is done in >> it’s driver.py. >> >> >> >> Alexey >> >> >> >> *From:* Yujun Zhang [mailto:zhangyujun+...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Thursday, August 25, 2016 4:50 AM >> *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [vitrage] relationship_type in >> static_datasources >> >> >> >> Hi, Ifat, >> >> >> >> I searched for edge_labels in the project. It seems it is validated only >> in `vitrage/evaluator/template_validation/template_syntax_validator.py`. >> Where is such restriction applied in static_datasources? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Yujun >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:19 PM Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL) < >> ifat.a...@nokia.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Yujun, >> >> >> >> Indeed, we have some restrictions on the relationship types that can be >> used in the static datasources. I think we should remove these >> restrictions, and allow any kind of relationship type. >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> Ifat. >> >> >> >> *From: *Yujun Zhang >> *Date: *Monday, 22 August 2016 at 08:37 >> >> I'm following the sample configuration in docs [1] to verify how static >> datasources works. >> >> >> >> It seems `backup` relationship is not displayed in the entity graph view >> and neither is it included in topology show. >> >> >> >> There is an enumeration for edge labels [2]. Should relationship in >> static datasource be limited to it? >> >> >> >> [1] >> https://github.com/openstack/vitrage/blob/master/doc/source/static-physical-config.rst >> >> [2] >> https://github.com/openstack/vitrage/blob/master/vitrage/common/constants.py#L49 >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >
__________________________________________________________________________ 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