Add HA section to template file
It was noted during the Dublin PTG that we had a gap in our Spec process as we did not ask people to consider impacts upon Cinder's Active/Active HA support. This patch adds a section asking the user to consider such implications. Change-Id: Ief51ab73f0cd3fece8cc8b5792b6dfd1e415aede
This commit is contained in:
@@ -178,6 +178,29 @@ guidelines are a work in progress and are designed to help you identify
|
|||||||
security best practices. For further information, feel free to reach out
|
security best practices. For further information, feel free to reach out
|
||||||
to the OpenStack Security Group at openstack-security@lists.openstack.org.
|
to the OpenStack Security Group at openstack-security@lists.openstack.org.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Active/Active HA impact
|
||||||
|
-----------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Describe any potential impact upon Cinder's Active/Active HA support. Some of the
|
||||||
|
items to consider include:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Could this impact stats/information reporting across multiple HA
|
||||||
|
control nodes?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Are there locking concerns that need to be addressed across multiple
|
||||||
|
HA control nodes?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Will RPC calls have to consider the cluster? I.E. use the
|
||||||
|
"service_topic_queue" when calling the "_get_cctxt" method.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Does this add a new cleanable resource?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Does the operation require a state change in the workers table?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Is there additional testing that might be necessary in an HA
|
||||||
|
environment?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Notifications impact
|
Notifications impact
|
||||||
--------------------
|
--------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user