openstack team mailing list archive

[Jay Pipes <jaypipes@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Devin Carlen <devin.carlen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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.

Then we should move nova/objectstore/* into /nova/api/ec2 since it
will never be used for anything openstack API-related, at the very
least...

-jay