Should I update a server via the template or directly?

asked 2015-01-06 11:39:22 -0600

adam__ gravatar image

Using the orchestration API I make a server, attach to an existing network, with a new volume that is also attached to it. Now in the future (weeks/months down the line) if I want to update that server to have 1 or more new volumes attached to it (or to attach something else to it) what is the correct way to accomplish this?

Should I modify my template to include these new attachments? Doesn't this have the possibility of becoming quite unruly as my server has more things/talks to more things?

Or should I just create and attach a volume directly?

The 2nd one to me seems easier but I feel like it might not be the OpenStack way of doing things.

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete

1 answer

Sort by ยป oldest newest most voted

answered 2015-01-07 19:09:23 -0600

asalkeld gravatar image

Hi Adam

I'd suggest using Heat update for this, if you don't you are basically not going to want to use heat again as any further update will have a chance of removing what you added manually. Basically your template and reality are getting out of sync.

"Doesn't this have the possibility of becoming quite unruly as my server has more things/talks to more things?"

I honestly don't see how using heat (or not) changes this? Do you mean that the template is getting more complex? - your infrastructure is getting more complex and the template is designed to describe that for you. Pick up the template and create it elsewhere and you have the same thing. Now if you are doing manual steps you lose that capablity.


edit flag offensive delete link more


Thanks for your comment! WRT unruliness I just thought that it may be easier to click "Add Volume" than to find the appropriate place in a (possibly large) template.

If HEAT is the way forward for OpenStack then why are the neutron and cinder APIs exposed? Are they just duplicating functionality?

adam__ gravatar imageadam__ ( 2015-01-08 03:44:40 -0600 )edit

First of all, Heat only works by calling the public Neutron and Cinder (and other) APIs for you.

Secondly, nobody said that Heat is 'the way forward for OpenStack', just that if you choose to use Heat then you lose most of the benefits of that choice if you don't use it consistently.

zaneb gravatar imagezaneb ( 2015-01-26 14:51:48 -0600 )edit

Get to know Ask OpenStack

Resources for moderators

Question Tools

1 follower


Asked: 2015-01-06 11:39:22 -0600

Seen: 409 times

Last updated: Jan 07 '15