Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository. https://git.platform-os.org/openstack/kolla.git/atom?h=master 2025-03-21T09:37:17+00:00 2025-03-21T09:37:17+00:00 Michal Nasiadka mnasiadka@gmail.com 2025-03-20T14:56:14+00:00 urn:sha1:f2fba3842cd520161f5c136297d806e9fe4d7521 Change-Id: I05a96f27b47a0f87bcf435872dd08ec0927232e3 2019-11-05T14:12:46+00:00 Martin Chlumsky martin.chlumsky@ubisoft.com 2019-11-04T18:46:49+00:00 urn:sha1:2d122afaf9817cadc668b308c4f736e47c09a55f Instead of doing a recursive chown on /srv/node, chown only /srv/node and any immediate subdirectory under /srv/node. Change-Id: I8fd93fa77ba9fc63910360300b8783a34bd4e6d5 Closes-Bug: #1851169 2018-08-06T09:18:30+00:00 Ha Manh Dong donghm@vn.fujitsu.com 2018-08-06T09:09:06+00:00 urn:sha1:065651a3fb06b3d5091541c048fe0def6ec45a66 Due to there is no way to execute swift graceful shutdown commands from swift-bootstrap container to swift service containers, so we need to revert the patch set at [1]. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560248/ Change-Id: I3363895347c535054584d63e22284c211ca38ad6 2018-07-13T03:26:36+00:00 confi-surya singh.surya64mnnit@gmail.com 2018-04-11T03:03:29+00:00 urn:sha1:dc1389bc586f800389dc4eff3c33be593e352d76 Apply Swift rolling upgrade based on recommendations from Swift PTL John Dickinson at [1] [1]https://www.swiftstack.com/blog/2013/12/20/upgrade-openstack-swift-no-downtime/ Co-Authored-By: Duong Ha-Quang <duonghq@vn.fujitsu.com> Co-Authored-By: Ha Manh Dong <donghm@vn.fujitsu.com> Change-Id: Ic59a2d2dda3469af5d4259e020d22b619ff7d603 Implements: blueprint apply-service-upgrade-procedure 2017-11-28T13:59:43+00:00 James McCarthy james.m.mccarthy@oracle.com 2017-11-24T12:40:32+00:00 urn:sha1:f7b453d95b9ce3efd45071134b143712b879f98e There are corresponding ansible changes to go with these image changes - add nc to swift image, and create dir for lock files. nc allows for rsync replication to easily target {{ swift_rsync_port }} change the lock file location for swift user to access - see bug for more details. Change-Id: I78826aeee35601ff65cbe50932482ef2f68346ae Closes-Bug: #1733851 2016-04-21T16:54:30+00:00 Serguei Bezverkhi sbezverk@cisco.com 2016-04-21T16:47:15+00:00 urn:sha1:d553514cb74c9cc29bad38bd6d4d9d392389cab8 This PS configures swift-rsyncd process to use non-default port from the range above 1024. Change-Id: I7c37c548a5185a2ffac789383fe012619e401131 Closes-Bug: #1573137 2016-02-01T18:14:31+00:00 Qiu Yu qiuyu@ebaysf.com 2016-01-29T19:06:31+00:00 urn:sha1:b209da1306c454366210e88f5a7a0e14bdd88fc4 Current Swift playbook is based on the preassumption of AIO setup. However, if one goes with default multinode setup (ansible/inventory/multinode), it follows the P + ACO deployment model, which proxy-server runs on controller nodes where ACO (account/container/object services) run on storage nodes. It will break because swift proxy-server no longer has access (it shouldn't have) to /srv/node path. This change ensure disk mounting part only happens on storage node. It also moves chown from proxy-server Dockerfile to rsyncd because no matter with PACO, P+ACO or P+A+C+O model, rsyncd is always running on each storage node. Change-Id: I3aa20454902caa9c84d3901bb91e4e4c93ac5f34 Partially-Implements: blueprint swift-physical-disk Closes-Bug: #1537544