►
From YouTube: 2019-06-24:: Ceph Orchestration Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
In
the
in
the
last,
a
hot
meeting,
okay,
but
what
what
I
found
trying
to
implement
this
in
the
in
the
hassle?
Okay,
stator,
is
that
well
in
order
to
do
set
up
one
song,
I
needed
v
to
half
every
Amazon
group
and
this
kind
of
configuration
all
the
structure
of
the
rtw.
So
the
four-minute
was
a
little
bit
strange
to
see
that
in
ruku
we
are
only
using
the
name
of
the
song
in
in
order
to
to
set
up-
and
you
are
a
DW
know.
B
So
that
was
me
my
fist
in
person,
so
I
raised
my
tops
and
why
we
we
did
that
with
rook,
but
it
seems
that
is
the
most
simple
configuration
that
we
can
use,
but
I,
don't
think.
Well,
I,
don't
know
if
it
is
correct
completely,
because
we
are
what
everything
that
the
final
user
can
choose:
the
configuration
of
the
briam
of
the
thumb
groups
to
set
quite
what
is
the
main
zone
group?
What
is
the
secondaries
from
the
phone
group?
A
And
with
the
rook
design,
where
we
started,
is
that
yeah
we
didn't?
We
don't
allow
them
to
select
any
of
that.
The
realms
own
groups
zones
just
because
they
get
the
simple
case
up
and
working
with
multiple
object
stores.
We
thought-
or
we
just
put
them
in
a
dependent,
some
groups
in
realms-
and
it
just
hasn't
been
touched
since
it
was
created
a
year
or
two
ago.
So
yeah
I
wouldn't
be
surprised
if
we
need
to
change
that
design
to
allow
selecting
the
different
realms
and
things.
B
Another
different
thing
is
the
configuration
that
we
are
going
to
use
in
this
service,
so
I
think
that,
probably
when
we
can
use
a
default
configuration
and
to
set
up
a
default
configuration
using
one
kind
of
Orchestrator
command
and,
in
the
other
side
to
use
specific
instructions
in
the
indicator
in
order
to
add
or
remove
nodes
that
that
are
using
in
this
default
configuration
but
to
have
commands
in
order
to
set
up
the
configuration
to
set
up.
This
is
the
Ryan.
This
is
the
some
groups.
This
is
the
main.
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
D
Now
it
was
out
of
sync
and
I
had
to
rebase
it
again,
because
there
was
a
conflict
with
the
Javanese
note,
but
pushed
it
again
and
I
thought
to
see
a
thing
to
see.
I
just
had
an
issue
so
we'll
see
what's
gonna
happen.
I
just
sent
an
initial
version
draft
version
of
the
X
notice
to
support
at
this
point.
What
we
can
do
is
we
can
already
connect
to
an
external
cluster
which
is
actually
what
we
wanted.
D
D
I
am
I
just
squash,
some
of
them,
but
that's
that's
where
we
are
that's
where
we
are
now
I
think
I'm
going
to
try
to
go
back
to
the
improving
upgrades
so
that
we
merge
it
today,
because
I
have
to
have
some
I
have
to
do
some
rephrasing
on
this
one
for
the
external
Chester
and
yeah.
That's
it's
moving!
Oh
yeah.
Quite
a
P
about
this,
and
so
I
have
four
for
today.
A
A
D
D
F
E
A
Okay,
so
if
you,
if
there's
no
skip
CI
flag,
then
Jenkins
will
just
do
this
thing
pretty
much.
It
always
fails
right
now
until
we
resolve
a
known
issue
with
the
crew
Bernays,
1.13
and
14
builds,
but
so
what
we've
been?
What
I've
been
doing
basically
is
look
for
a
green,
build,
at
least
on
majority
of
the
kubernetes
versions,
and
if
it
looks
like
a
known
issue
for
the
other
two
which
it
pretty
much
always
is
then
I
go
ahead
and
add,
skip
see.
A
A
A
Just
I
think
I
put
this
in
there
last
week,
but
there's
the
design
for
basing
OS
D's
on
top
of
PVCs.
That
design
is
progressing,
not
a
lot
to
report
on
that
I
think.
But
there
were
several
discussions
and
Sebastian
Wagner
was
also
pointing
out
device
sets.
How
might
they
might
be
considered,
but
that's
a
separate
design
really
and
I.
A
F
F
F
F
A
Right
and
yeah
I
know
you've
put
a
lot
of
effort
into
these
Dusty's
before
and
then
you've
had
to
kind
of
put
it
on
hold
or
or
throw
it
away.
So
anything
we
can
do
to
it
avoid
that
again,
that's
I
guess
when
I
was
to
be
more
proactive
about
iterating
on
it,
you
don't
end
up
there
again,
your
benefit.