[heketi-devel] OpenShift Templates: Unnecessary?

[Luis Pabon]

I'm not sure what meeting you are talking about.  Templates do not compare
with daemonsets.  Templates is the ability to substitute variables in an
object.  Your comparison is incorrect.  A better comparison is that
Deployments (or DeploymentConfig in OpenShift) allow for rollback,
upgrades, etc.  True, today daemonsets do not have that upgrade ability,
but it is going to be added.

Templates themselves provide no benefit to our deployments.

- Luis

On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Humble Chirammal <hchiramm at redhat.com>
wrote:

> As I pointed out in our meeting, templates bring us the main advantage of
> upgrading our solution with different strategies like rolllback and upgrade
> to a particular version ..etc  which is not possible with just  a config
> artifact like Deamonset. So, according to me we should keep it.
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Jose A. Rivera <jarrpa at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Okay, what are these advantages? :) It would be a lot easier to
>> maintain one set of files for both Kube and OpenShift than separate
>> files for each.
>>
>> --Jose
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Humble Chirammal <hchiramm at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> > More or less, there are different advantages we get when we use
>> Templates,
>> > so I am negative to drop templates from our deployment model.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Humble Chirammal <hchiramm at redhat.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi jose,
>> >>
>> >> Iic, templates are the recommended way to deploy an application in
>> >> openshift. Also 'Deamonset' can be inside a template. So I dont see a
>> reason
>> >> to move away from Templates :)
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:46 AM, Jose A. Rivera <jarrpa at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Heyo,
>> >>>
>> >>> Naturally, as soon as I upload OpenShift support for the gk-deploy
>> >>> script, I find myself wondering: why do we have templates for heketi
>> >>> for OpenShift? Specifically, why do we create Template objects instead
>> >>> of the direct objects (e.g. Service, DeploymentConfig)? Do we have a
>> >>> need for the ability to recreate heketi pods with different parameters
>> >>> within the same namespace? We live without them in Kubernetes, and at
>> >>> present even with Templates the deployment of heketi in OpenShift is
>> >>> not much easier for a sysadmin if at all.
>> >>>
>> >>> --Jose
>> >>>
>> >>> P.S. This all comes as I'm trying to bring a DaemonSet GlusterFS to
>> >>> OpenShift. ;)
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> heketi-devel mailing list
>> >>> heketi-devel at gluster.org
>> >>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/heketi-devel
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> heketi-devel mailing list
> heketi-devel at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/heketi-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/heketi-devel/attachments/20161208/c01852c8/attachment.html>