-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[WIP] Fixes #20852 - Refactor module #136
Changes from all commits
81ed476
59fc6b1
f8a4d8a
8c16107
a0d7c37
cbeda98
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@ | ||
# The pulp master configuration | ||
# | ||
# This scenario assumes the pulp master is already configured otherwise, | ||
# usually via puppet-katello. Here we only configure the qpid router (if | ||
# desired) and crane. | ||
class foreman_proxy_content::pulp::master ( | ||
Boolean $qpid_router = $::foreman_proxy_content::qpid_router, | ||
String $hub_host = $::foreman_proxy_content::qpid_router_hub_addr, | ||
Integer[0, 65535] $hub_port = $::foreman_proxy_content::qpid_router_hub_port, | ||
String $broker_host = $::foreman_proxy_content::qpid_router_broker_addr, | ||
Integer[0, 65535] $broker_port = $::foreman_proxy_content::qpid_router_broker_port, | ||
) { | ||
if $qpid_router { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Maybe this should be it's own manifest? Pulp does not actually talk to the router and you may choose to deploy the router separately from your Pulp host or even your qpid host. That is, you could have Pulp server, Qpid server and Qdrouter running all separately or router and qpid paired. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think you're right. |
||
include ::foreman_proxy_content::dispatch_router | ||
|
||
qpid::router::listener {'hub': | ||
host => $hub_host, | ||
port => $hub_port, | ||
role => 'inter-router', | ||
ssl_profile => 'server', | ||
} | ||
|
||
# Connect dispatch router to the local qpid | ||
qpid::router::connector { 'broker': | ||
host => $broker_host, | ||
port => $broker_port, | ||
ssl_profile => 'client', | ||
role => 'route-container', | ||
idle_timeout => 0, | ||
} | ||
|
||
qpid::router::link_route { 'broker-pulp-route-out': | ||
prefix => 'pulp.', | ||
direction => 'out', | ||
connection => 'broker', | ||
} | ||
|
||
qpid::router::link_route { 'broker-pulp-task-route-in': | ||
prefix => 'pulp.task', | ||
direction => 'in', | ||
connection => 'broker', | ||
} | ||
|
||
qpid::router::link_route { 'broker-qmf-route-in': | ||
prefix => 'qmf.', | ||
direction => 'in', | ||
connection => 'broker', | ||
} | ||
|
||
qpid::router::link_route { 'broker-qmf-route-out': | ||
prefix => 'qmf.', | ||
direction => 'out', | ||
connection => 'broker', | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
include ::certs::apache | ||
class { '::pulp::crane': | ||
cert => $::certs::apache::apache_cert, | ||
key => $::certs::apache::apache_key, | ||
ca_cert => $::certs::ca_cert, | ||
data_dir => '/var/lib/pulp/published/docker/v2/app', | ||
subscribe => Class['certs::apache'], | ||
} | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This can run on a Smart proxy as well serving up docker content off the Pulp server there. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That's why I added |
||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We really should replace the node nomenclature.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indeed, but what should be the correct name?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I reached out to pulp-dev list to look for commonly accepted nomenclature. The best I could arrive at is 'parent' and 'child' from the responses I got.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Given in how many places this naming is currently used, I'm leaning to keeping that outside of this refactor.