Excerpts from Angus Salkeld's message of 2014-09-22 20:31:46 -0700: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Anant Patil <anant.pa...@hp.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > In convergence, we discuss about having concurrent updates to a stack. I > > wanted to know if it is safe to assume that the an update will be a > > super set of it's previous updates. Understanding this is critical to > > arrive at implementation of concurrent stack operations. > > > > Assuming that an admin will have VCS setup and will issue requests by > > checking-out the template and modifying it, I could see that the updates > > will be incremental and not discreet. Is this assumption correct? When > > an update is issued before a previous update is complete, would the > > template for that be based on the template of previously issued > > incomplete update or the last completed one? > > > > I don't think you can assume anything about the update. What if the user > just posts a > totally different template? That is still a valid update. Or they post an > empty template > to delete the resources.
Agreed. The new template simply replaces the graph with a new version. If that graph happens to change everything, then the old things will now be in a "should not exist" desired state and the new template convergence should remove them when it gets to the garbage collection at the end. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
