Jay Pipes wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Ewan Mellor <ewan.mel...@eu.citrix.com> > wrote: >> We could do it in two steps. You could set up nova-compute -> Glance -> >> nova-objectstore (testing purposes only). This would allow us to remove the >> S3 code from Nova, but people could still use nova-objectstore if they don't >> want to set up Swift. > > This is already done in Bexar, as Chris MacGown completed the S3 > backend for Glance. What is NOT the same, though, is that people would > not be speaking the s3 API as they do now... they would speak the > Glance REST-like API instead... Plus, objects are a superset of > images; Glance only stores images, not all objects... > >> Incidentally, it's also possible for Glance to use a local filesystem rather >> than a remote store at all. This is perfectly reasonable for small setups. > > I think the big difference is that clients would be talking to Glance > and its RESTlike/JSON API, not to an S3 API front-end like > nova-objectstore. > > The big question is whether OpenStack wants to support Amazon S3 as an > objectstore at all, instead of just Swift, which now can communicate > via an S3 API > (http://swift.openstack.org/misc.html#module-swift.common.middleware.swift3).
OK, my understanding was that euca-upload-bundle is talking directly to an S3-like backend, so if we want to support "the EC2 way of registering images" we need some S3-compatible server... For serious deployments I guess we would use Swift S3 frontend. For demo cases, do we need a simpler solution ? And if yes, which one ? -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) Release Manager, OpenStack _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
