From 313674b3ca3645588c270a7d4a3572d244e4fa7b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Jay S. Bryant" Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 18:10:38 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Add HA section to template file It was noted during the Dublin PTG that we had a gap in our Spec process as we did not ask people to consider impacts upon Cinder's Active/Active HA support. This patch adds a section asking the user to consider such implications. Change-Id: Ief51ab73f0cd3fece8cc8b5792b6dfd1e415aede --- specs/template.rst | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) diff --git a/specs/template.rst b/specs/template.rst index 1c6ded8f..f962c8c9 100644 --- a/specs/template.rst +++ b/specs/template.rst @@ -178,6 +178,29 @@ guidelines are a work in progress and are designed to help you identify security best practices. For further information, feel free to reach out to the OpenStack Security Group at openstack-security@lists.openstack.org. +Active/Active HA impact +----------------------- + +Describe any potential impact upon Cinder's Active/Active HA support. Some of the +items to consider include: + +* Could this impact stats/information reporting across multiple HA + control nodes? + +* Are there locking concerns that need to be addressed across multiple + HA control nodes? + +* Will RPC calls have to consider the cluster? I.E. use the + "service_topic_queue" when calling the "_get_cctxt" method. + +* Does this add a new cleanable resource? + +* Does the operation require a state change in the workers table? + +* Is there additional testing that might be necessary in an HA + environment? + + Notifications impact --------------------