Understood.
I have submitted a patch to pbr for review here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/466225/
--
View this message in context:
http://openstack.10931.n7.nabble.com/gnocchi-Running-Gnocchi-API-in-specific-interface-tp135004p135095.html
Sent from the Developer mailing list archive at Na
On Thu, May 18 2017, aalvarez wrote:
> Yes but doesn't Pecan allow to use a development server (pecan serve) that
> can accept interface and port options? I thought this would be the
> test/development server Gnocchi would use.
We could but there's no need and it's just one line to rely on pbr's
Yes but doesn't Pecan allow to use a development server (pecan serve) that
can accept interface and port options? I thought this would be the
test/development server Gnocchi would use.
--
View this message in context:
http://openstack.10931.n7.nabble.com/gnocchi-Running-Gnocchi-API-in-specific-
On Thu, May 18 2017, Hanxi Liu wrote:
> Ceilometer, Gnocchi, Aodh all use pbr, so the port is 8000 by default.
>
> I guess we also should hardcode Gnocchi's port in rdo project, together
> with Aodh.
> i proposed patchs for Aodh and Gnocchi:
>
> https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/5848/
> https://
On Thu, May 18 2017, aalvarez wrote:
> I thought the API was based on and mounted by Pecan? Isn't there a way to
> pass these options to Pecan?
Pecan is an API framework, not a HTTP server.
--
Julien Danjou
# Free Software hacker
# https://julien.danjou.info
signature.asc
Description: PGP sig
I thought the API was based on and mounted by Pecan? Isn't there a way to
pass these options to Pecan?
--
View this message in context:
http://openstack.10931.n7.nabble.com/gnocchi-Running-Gnocchi-API-in-specific-interface-tp135004p135012.html
Sent from the Developer mailing list archive at Nab
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Wed, May 17 2017, aalvarez wrote:
>
> > I do not need this functionality for production, but for testing. I
> think it
> > would be nice if we can specify the interface for the gnocchi-api even
> for
> > test purposes, just like the port.
On Wed, May 17 2017, aalvarez wrote:
> I do not need this functionality for production, but for testing. I think it
> would be nice if we can specify the interface for the gnocchi-api even for
> test purposes, just like the port.
Feel free to send a patch. This is provided by pbr so that's where
I do not need this functionality for production, but for testing. I think it
would be nice if we can specify the interface for the gnocchi-api even for
test purposes, just like the port.
--
View this message in context:
http://openstack.10931.n7.nabble.com/gnocchi-Running-Gnocchi-API-in-specifi
Hi,
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:14:06AM +0800, Andres Alvarez wrote:
Hello folks
The gnocchi-api command allows running the API server usign a spefic port:
usage: gnocchi-api [-h] [--port PORT] -- [passed options]
positional arguments:
-- [passed options] '--' is the separator of the argume
Hello folks
The gnocchi-api command allows running the API server usign a spefic port:
usage: gnocchi-api [-h] [--port PORT] -- [passed options]
positional arguments:
-- [passed options] '--' is the separator of the arguments used to start
the WSGI server and the argu
11 matches
Mail list logo