Re: [foreman-dev] Katello pulp_export_destination checks happen inside the application
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:05:46AM +0200, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote: On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 08:06:01AM +0200, Timo Goebel wrote: Am 20.08.17 um 22:39 schrieb Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden: I think if Pulp took a parameter to publish to a non-default location, we would not need to do the extra copy step that ties Katello and Pulp closely together. Currently it is needed because we need the export to land in pulp_export_destination. That would be nice. To me it looks like it already sends the export_directory to pulp and has an absolute path. Is there a reason this can't be set to Setting['pulp_export_destination'] directly? What would you think, if we let smart_proxy_pulp handle the copy job and checking if the directories exist? That would loosen the coupling between Katello and Pulp? That was my first thought as well and it is the typical approach taken within the (vanilla) Foreman architecture. This is where Katello really differs and would require a major rewrite of certain integrations. If we all agree Katello should never assume a service shares its filesystem with another service I can create issues for everything I run into. You are suggesting to apply the vanilla Foreman approach and I certainly agree this is a nice architecture that I always liked as a user but it does take effort to get there. A fix in Pulp would also be nice because it's now doing copies which can be a lot of IO. For this issue I created http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/20854 and for now set it to Blocks http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/20850 but it can be downgraded to a known limitation. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [foreman-dev] Katello pulp_export_destination checks happen inside the application
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 08:06:01AM +0200, Timo Goebel wrote: Am 20.08.17 um 22:39 schrieb Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden: I think if Pulp took a parameter to publish to a non-default location, we would not need to do the extra copy step that ties Katello and Pulp closely together. Currently it is needed because we need the export to land in pulp_export_destination. That would be nice. To me it looks like it already sends the export_directory to pulp and has an absolute path. Is there a reason this can't be set to Setting['pulp_export_destination'] directly? What would you think, if we let smart_proxy_pulp handle the copy job and checking if the directories exist? That would loosen the coupling between Katello and Pulp? That was my first thought as well and it is the typical approach taken within the (vanilla) Foreman architecture. This is where Katello really differs and would require a major rewrite of certain integrations. If we all agree Katello should never assume a service shares its filesystem with another service I can create issues for everything I run into. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [foreman-dev] Katello pulp_export_destination checks happen inside the application
Am 20.08.17 um 22:39 schrieb Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden: I think if Pulp took a parameter to publish to a non-default location, we would not need to do the extra copy step that ties Katello and Pulp closely together. Currently it is needed because we need the export to land in pulp_export_destination. That would be nice. To me it looks like it already sends the export_directory to pulp and has an absolute path. Is there a reason this can't be set to Setting['pulp_export_destination'] directly? What would you think, if we let smart_proxy_pulp handle the copy job and checking if the directories exist? That would loosen the coupling between Katello and Pulp? Timo -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [foreman-dev] Katello pulp_export_destination checks happen inside the application
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 04:11:13PM -0400, Christopher Duryee wrote: On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden < ew...@kohlvanwijngaarden.nl> wrote: Hello all, While working on splitting the Katello installation from its services I ran into the pulp_export_destination setting. That made me look at the Repository Export[1] which assumes the pulp server and application server share the same filesystem. That means I'm stuck in attempting to split services to different machines where I don't want to assume a shared filesystem. Looking at the containers it's not handled there either. I don't see a way to support this feature without a major rewrite of the code but I'm not familiar with the Katello code base. Anyone has advice on how to deal with this? I think if Pulp took a parameter to publish to a non-default location, we would not need to do the extra copy step that ties Katello and Pulp closely together. Currently it is needed because we need the export to land in pulp_export_destination. That would be nice. To me it looks like it already sends the export_directory to pulp and has an absolute path. Is there a reason this can't be set to Setting['pulp_export_destination'] directly? [1]: https://github.com/Katello/katello/blob/master/app/lib/actions/katello/repository/export.rb -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [foreman-dev] Katello pulp_export_destination checks happen inside the application
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden < ew...@kohlvanwijngaarden.nl> wrote: > Hello all, > > While working on splitting the Katello installation from its services I > ran into the pulp_export_destination setting. That made me look at the > Repository Export[1] which assumes the pulp server and application server > share the same filesystem. > > That means I'm stuck in attempting to split services to different machines > where I don't want to assume a shared filesystem. Looking at the containers > it's not handled there either. I don't see a way to support this feature > without a major rewrite of the code but I'm not familiar with the Katello > code base. > > Anyone has advice on how to deal with this? > I think if Pulp took a parameter to publish to a non-default location, we would not need to do the extra copy step that ties Katello and Pulp closely together. Currently it is needed because we need the export to land in pulp_export_destination. > > [1]: https://github.com/Katello/katello/blob/master/app/lib/actio > ns/katello/repository/export.rb > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[foreman-dev] Katello pulp_export_destination checks happen inside the application
Hello all, While working on splitting the Katello installation from its services I ran into the pulp_export_destination setting. That made me look at the Repository Export[1] which assumes the pulp server and application server share the same filesystem. That means I'm stuck in attempting to split services to different machines where I don't want to assume a shared filesystem. Looking at the containers it's not handled there either. I don't see a way to support this feature without a major rewrite of the code but I'm not familiar with the Katello code base. Anyone has advice on how to deal with this? [1]: https://github.com/Katello/katello/blob/master/app/lib/actions/katello/repository/export.rb -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
