incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chiradeep Vittal <Chiradeep.Vit...@citrix.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Virtual machine's Base Image Updatation Facility
Date Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:14:11 GMT
The JEOS approach does not work well with Windows. Specifically patch
management / gold image management with desktop vms where there is a high
density of vms with the same base image (say Win7). It is more economical
and easier to "discard" the unpatched / previous image than to maintain
patches on each desktop vm.
The bonus is that the vm maintains its identity (mac / ip) which seems
critical for some desktop apps.

On 12/27/12 7:40 AM, "David Nalley" <david@gnsa.us> wrote:

>On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
><Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:
>> Templates should be immutable --if there is a new version created, then
>>it
>> is another template.
>> The api should just take a reference to the new template and not try to
>> deal with trickiness around updating templates. That workflow
>>(versioning
>> templates) is a different ball of wax entirely.
>>
>
>Agreed.
>Templates should be immutable.
>Additionally - the sysadmin side of me doesn't understand why I'd want
>to do this at all. The template exists to get me to JEOS running - not
>to manage updates. I (should) have tools that handle keeping all of my
>deployed VMs in a consistent state, and updated to the proper version.
>Trying to turn CloudStack into a patch management/package management
>service seems a bit too much scope creep IMO.
>
>--David


Mime
View raw message