fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Mike Scherbakov <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Great finding!
I believe there were some minor issues, and there were no use cases for
using all-in-one deployment. That's why we kept it as is, and didn't even
bother fixing the issues. If we remove restriction, then it means we have
to test it thoroughly. For this particular case, there is 95% guarantee
that it will work just fine on one node if it works on two.

So I'm +1 for removing the restriction. It will also allow us to rewrite
some smoke tests to use single-node env to speed up Fuel CI checks.

However we must keep at least system tests for distributed envs, as it is
easy to hardcode "localhost" somewhere and we must always ensure that Fuel
works in distributed mode.


On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Ryan Moe <rmoe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> What were the reasons for not allowing a node to have both the compute and
> controller roles? In my initial testing it appears that this works fine.
> OSTF passes, all controller functions continue working, VMs boot, etc. If
> those original concerns are no longer valid or if they can be addressed
> then we can remove another arbitrary restriction from Fuel.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Ryan
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


-- 
Mike Scherbakov
#mihgen