►
From YouTube: Repeatable DB creation Demo (2021-09-29)
A
A
So
first
item
was
something
I
saw
that
came
out
of
the
registry
database
project,
which
I
think
we
should
follow
up
on,
which
is
some
different
behavior
on
the
1804.
A
My
understanding
is
that
we're
using
the
bluetooth
1804
for
the
registry
for
at
the
registry
for
the
paternity
cluster
for
registry.
I
haven't
seen
this
ourselves,
so
you
know.
Maybe
we
should
check
to
see
whether
we
see
this
behavior.
B
Yeah,
we
don't
use
16
years
old
for
the
dns
lookup
for
for
the
db
provisioning,
at
least.
A
We
had
a
discussion
this
morning,
we're
going
to
rename
gitcom
infrastructure
and
start
bringing
in
ansible
workloads.
This
means
that
we
might
deprecate
the
provisioning
project,
create
an
epic
for
that.
That's
linked
to
staging
build
out
epic,
I'm
probably
going
to
get
started
on
that
soon,
maybe
as
soon
as
today
or
tomorrow,
and
hopefully
it'll
move
fast
once
we
do
that,
then
I'd
like
to
shoot.
A
We
don't
have
anything
to
demo
for
today,
but
I'd
like
to
target
for
next
week's
demo
to
get
staging
infrastructure
provisioned
and
maybe
even
join
the
existing
petronium
cluster,
but
we'll
see
how
that
goes
before
we
do
that.
We
need
to
support
encryption
for
console,
which
is
at
number
three.
I
submitted
an
mr
to
kind
of
get
those
changes
started,
and
this
creates
environment
secrets
and
a
secret
for
the
encryption
for
console.
A
I
had
to
de-vendor
the
console
template
from
get
because
get
doesn't
support
this
right
now
and
grant's
on
here,
but
I'll
just
say
like
we
talked
about
it
and
it
sounds
like
we're.
Gonna
wait
until
omnibus
officially
supports
this
before
we
do
anything
and
get
right.
C
Yeah
we
we
always
try
and
follow
on
the
bus
to
stop
us
from
drifting
too
far
and
making
get
essentially
a
competitor
to
on
the
bus
and.
B
C
On
that
burden
that
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
manage
because
the
distribution
team
obviously
bigger,
so
we
always-
we
always
suggest
pushing
on
the
bus
for
it
happening
on
the
bus
first
and
then
we'd
happily
expose
the
settings
on
our
end.
But
yeah.
That's
the.
A
Character,
yeah,
so
this
also,
it
also
came
up
where
I
guess
we
have
this
more
general
problem
where
we
set
a
configuration
param
or
we
set
the
configuration
hash
in
the
gitlab
rb
template
and
I
don't
have
any
way
to
add
additional
items
to
that
hash.
C
A
Yeah-
and
there
was
another
case
where
I
needed
to
add
meta
labels
to
it,
and
I
just
wanted
to
like
pass
that
in
now
we
could,
we
could
add
explicit,
supporting
debt.
I
guess
to
like
you
know,
if
you
want
to
add
specific
configuration
items,
you
set
them
as
a
new
variable
and
then
you
kind
of
merge
that
in
or
what
like,
I
don't
know
at.
C
Yeah
it's
going
to
be,
it
will
be.
It
depends
on
the
specific
setting,
of
course,
but
yeah
when
it
comes
to
like
a
setting.
That
itself
is
a
hash,
that's
not
as
agreeable
for
our
approach
for
any
approach
really
to
automate
on
the
bus.
It's
not
not
just
us
that
would
suffer
from
this.
The
idea,
obviously,
is
that
once
this
particularly
for
this
thing,
one
once
is
added
down
to
us
and
we
know
there's
guidance
documentation
or
maybe
not
that
far
as
long
as
we've
got
guidance
off.
C
This
is
how
you
set
up
security
on
console
hold
it
with,
like
all
the
all
the
features
that
console
itself
has
such
as
you
know,
encryption
between
and
everything
else
we
had
exposed
those
settings
in
the
hash
to
be.
You
know,
guest
settings
essentially
for
additional
settings
that
you
know.
C
I
guess
the
approach
would
be
raise
issues
where
you
can
expose
them
or
there
is
the
option,
obviously,
to
take
what
we
do
with
console
and
do
it
as
a
custom
config,
but
it
gets
messy
quickly
because
you
need
to
make
sure
you're
mimicking
what
we're
doing
so.
Basically,
we
need
to
keep
exposing
the
things
that
you
want
in
console
and
get
for
the
things
that
are
dropped
into
a
hash,
and
hopefully
there's
not
too
many
things
without
kicking
about
that.
We
have
to
do
that
for.
A
C
I
mean
the
good
news
is
because
it's
I
lost
my
train
of
thought.
There
sorry.
A
It's
okay,
yeah,
I
mean
another.
Another
option
is
that
in
in
the
extra
file
we
could,
instead
of
like
setting
gitlab,
configurate
or
sorry
instead
of
saying
console
configuration,
we
could
set
like
console
configuration
and
then
the
specific
item
right
and
then
that
will
make
it
so
that
it
doesn't
overwrite
the
entire
configuration
block.
I
guess
that's
an
option
we'll
have
to
figure
out
how
to
do
that,
but
it's
yeah,
I
would
say,
like
it's,
it's
tricky
right
because
because
I
want
to
keep,
I
want
to
keep
this
stuff.
C
Yeah,
we
don't
currently
support
templating
in
custom,
config
files-
I
don't
know
if
I'm
ahead,
if
there's
any
immediate
blockers
to
that,
it's
something
we
can
look
into
as
an
additional
in
the
future.
But
again
that
puts
the
onus
on
the
user,
because
we
have,
we
have
to
be
kind
of
binary
here.
Either
we
expose
the
options
and
get
or
we
give
the
full
configuration
to
the
end
user
and
anything
in
between
will
get
messy
quickly.
We
can
we
can.
C
A
I
agree:
yeah
yeah,
okay,
let's
let's
look
at
this.
A
No,
I
mean
I,
I
don't
think
it's
a
good
use
of
your
time
or
the
team's
time
to
to
look
at
this
now,
because
this
is
a
very
narrow
use
case
unless,
if
it
comes
up
for
other
teams
like
project
horse,
you
know-
I
would
say,
let's,
let's
not
worry
about
it-
yeah.
C
I
mean
it's
it's
a
weird
case,
though
it
yeah
it's
a
weird
case.
We'd
wanted
if,
as
soon
as
omnibus
gets
the
support
and
that's
where
I'd
that's
what
we
encourage
if
horse-
and
this
requires
encryption
and
on
the
bus,
then
omnibus-
should
get
support
to
handle
encryption.
C
A
C
A
Okay,
yep
that
sounds
good
and
then
number
four
we
now
support
or
now
get
supports.
I
think
the
issue
is
still
open,
but
it's
open
because
grant
you're
not
like
you
think
there
might
be
a
little
bit
more
work
to
do,
but
I
think
the
main
thing
that
was
blocking
us
is
now
complete,
which
is
we
can
pass
in
the
subnet.
So
we
can.
We
can
bang
out
this
issue
if
someone
wants
to
pick
it
up,
which
is
just
to
assign
our
instances
to
the
existing
bpc.
A
We'll
need
to
do
this
too,
when
we
do
staging
and
production
so
we'll
we'll
do
that
and
we've
reached
the
end
of
the
discussion
section
like
I
said
nothing
to
demo
for
this
week.
I
think
next
week,
I'm
hoping
to
demo
getting
like
building
out
into
staging.
You
know
adding
a
petroleum
cluster,
but
we'll
see
how
that
goes.
It
depends
on.
I
have
this
epic
to
refactor
the
gitlabcon
infrastructure
project,
so
it'll
depend
on
that
anything
else.
C
C
Quite
quickly
that
there
was
an
immediate
kind
of
iteration
to
unblock
because
you're
only
using
instances,
so
that's
it
now,
I'm
still
we're
still
there.
This
should
get
close
when
we
add
it
to
the
ref
arch
module,
we're
currently
going
for
the
design
of
for
you.
Obviously
the
settings
down
there.
So
you
can,
you
can
pass
in
wherever
you
wish,
so
you
can
you
could
you
could
create
multiple
subnets
in
your
world
and
the
reference
will
probably
only
create
one
subnet
per
region
as
required.