openstack team mailing list archive

[Devin Carlen <devin.carlen@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 17, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Thierry Carrez <thierry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Jay Pipes wrote:
>>> I think the big difference is that clients would be talking to Glance
>>> and its RESTlike/JSON API, not to an S3 API front-end like
>>> nova-objectstore.
>>> 
>>> The big question is whether OpenStack wants to support Amazon S3 as an
>>> objectstore at all, instead of just Swift, which now can communicate
>>> via an S3 API (http://swift.openstack.org/misc.html#module-swift.common.middleware.swift3).
>> 
>> OK, my understanding was that euca-upload-bundle is talking directly to
>> an S3-like backend, so if we want to support "the EC2 way of registering
>> images" we need some S3-compatible server...
> 
> Precisely. This is why nova-objectstore cannot be removed even if
> Glance supports S3 as a backend :)
> 
>> For serious deployments I guess we would use Swift S3 frontend. For demo
>> cases, do we need a simpler solution ? And if yes, which one ?
> 
> Depends on whether supporting euca-upload-bundle is going to be a
> priority once alternate openstack-API-speaking client tools are
> completed... :)
> 
> My guess is that it won't, and nova-objectstore will eventually move
> into /ext or /plugin for those who will want to continue using
> euca-upload-bundle directly.

I tend to disagree with this.  Anyone who is using eucatools is going to want to use euca-upload-bundle.  This is something we should continue to support.  Not supporting euca-upload-bundle means we don't have a fully compatible EC2 implementation.

> 
> -jay
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp