Whirr
  1. Whirr
  2. WHIRR-331

Add the ability to specify tarball URLs that are local to the remote machine

    Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: 0.6.0
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      It takes some time to download the tarballs on the remote machines. I believe it would be useful if we could specify URLs that are local to the remote machine (e.g remote:///tarballs/zookeeper-3.3.3.tar.gz). This feature could allow users to create AMIs that already contain all the required files for the install phase.

      1. WHIRR-331.patch
        0.7 kB
        Andrei Savu

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Andrei Savu added a comment -

          Trivial patch tested with Byon. I like the speed improvement.

          Show
          Andrei Savu added a comment - Trivial patch tested with Byon. I like the speed improvement.
          Hide
          Tom White added a comment -

          Could we just use file:// URLs, rather than inventing a scheme? Currently if you specify a file:// URL Whirr will look for the file on the launch machine, copy it to a blobstore, then download it to the launched instances. We could change the semantics so that if it wasn't found locally it would assume that it will be found on the launched instances.

          Show
          Tom White added a comment - Could we just use file:// URLs, rather than inventing a scheme? Currently if you specify a file:// URL Whirr will look for the file on the launch machine, copy it to a blobstore, then download it to the launched instances. We could change the semantics so that if it wasn't found locally it would assume that it will be found on the launched instances.
          Hide
          Andrei Savu added a comment -

          bg. Could we just use file:// URLs, rather than inventing a scheme?

          This could be confusing and error-prone but I'm fine with either way of doing things.

          Show
          Andrei Savu added a comment - bg. Could we just use file:// URLs, rather than inventing a scheme? This could be confusing and error-prone but I'm fine with either way of doing things.
          Hide
          Andrei Savu added a comment -

          How do we move on? Tibor, Lars, Adrian?

          Show
          Andrei Savu added a comment - How do we move on? Tibor, Lars, Adrian?
          Hide
          Tom White added a comment -

          I agree it could be confusing to use file:// in this case (e.g. misconfiguration of the local file) and am fine with remote://.

          Show
          Tom White added a comment - I agree it could be confusing to use file:// in this case (e.g. misconfiguration of the local file) and am fine with remote://.
          Hide
          Andrei Savu added a comment -

          I've just committed this. Thanks Tom!

          Show
          Andrei Savu added a comment - I've just committed this. Thanks Tom!

            People

            • Assignee:
              Andrei Savu
              Reporter:
              Andrei Savu
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              0 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Development