Sorry that I’m on vacation and will be back online after 06/06 , but thanks
for putting the PR out and I believe someone on our side will review it . (
or when I come back I will review them)

-Stephen

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 6:08 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote:

> Heya team,
>
> I have rebuilt one of the early PRs so that the docker image build pieces
> are integrated with the maven build. If this is acceptable to the
> reviewers, I'll go forward with integrating the other images and
> kustomize/kuttl tests in the same way.
>
> Please take a look.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> https://github.com/apache/hbase-operator-tools/pull/118
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 4:19 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Heya team,
> >
> > I have created individual pull-requests for each of the major functional
> > pieces outlined in the initial branch. These await review.
> >
> > I've now started working integrating the test harness into the maven
> > build. After a brief detour for a Yetus plugin, I'm now looking instead
> at
> > maven integration via exec-maven-plugin. I'm also investigating how to
> pull
> > the container image build up into maven as well.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nic,
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 2:42 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Heya team,
> >>
> >> I've created a feature ticket [0] from which this contribution can hang.
> >> I've created an associated release version [1] and feature branch [2]
> >> against which we can target PRs while things take shape. I've published
> my
> >> initial extraction of this feature as a whole for your review [3] --
> take a
> >> look at the big picture there. For each commit on that branch, I've
> created
> >> a sub-task on HBASE-27827. Probably reviewers will find other items we
> need
> >> to peel off as sub-tasks. I'll start turning each of these commits into
> PRs
> >> suitable for the Apache repo and your perusal.
> >>
> >> I think we're getting due for the 1.3 release of Operator Tools, so I
> >> expect this will land in 1.4.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Nick
> >>
> >> [0]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27827
> >> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE/fixforversion/12353199
> >> [2]:
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/hbase-operator-tools/tree/HBASE-27827-kubernetes-deployment
> >> [3]:
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/hbase-operator-tools/compare/HBASE-27827-kubernetes-deployment...ndimiduk:hbase-operator-tools:HBASE-27827-kubernetes-deployment
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 11:28 AM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Heya team,
> >>>
> >>> Over here at $dayjob, we have an increasing reliance on Kubernetes for
> >>> both development and production workloads. Our tools are maturing and
> >>> we're hoping that they might be of interest to the wider community.
> >>> I'd like to see if there's community interest in receiving some/any of
> >>> them as a contribution. I think we'll also need a plan from ASF Infra
> >>> that makes kubernetes available to us as a project.
> >>>
> >>> We have implemented a basic stack of tools for orchestrating ZK + HDFS
> >>> + HBase on Kubernetes. We use this for running a small local dev
> >>> cluster via MiniKube/KIND ; for ITBLL on smallish distributed clusters
> >>> in a public cloud ; and in production for running clusters of ~100
> >>> Data Nodes/Region Servers in a public cloud. There was an earlier
> >>> discussion about using our donation of test hardware for running more
> >>> thorough tests in our CI, but one of the limiting factors is full
> >>> cluster deployment. I hope that the community might be interested in
> >>> receiving this tooling as a foundation for more rigorous correctness
> >>> and maybe even performance tests in the open. Furthermore, perhaps the
> >>> wider community has interest in an Apache licensed cluster
> >>> orchestration tool for other uses.
> >>>
> >>> Now for some details: The implementation is built on Kustomize, so
> >>> it's fundamentally transparent resource specification with yaml
> >>> patches for composability; this is in contrast to a solution using
> >>> templates with defined capabilities and interfaces. There is no
> >>> operator ; it's all coordinated via init/bootstrap containers, shell
> >>> scripts, shared volumes for state, &c. For now.
> >>>
> >>> Such a donation will amount to a code drop, which will have its
> >>> challenges. I'm motivated via internal processes to carve it into
> >>> smaller pieces, and I think that will benefit community review as
> >>> well. Perhaps this approach could be used to make the contribution via
> >>> a feature branch.
> >>>
> >>> Is there community interest in adding such a capability to our
> >>> maintained responsibilities? I'd hope that we have several volunteers
> >>> to work with me through the contribution process, and who are
> >>> reasonably confident that they'll be able to help maintain such a
> >>> capability going forward. We'll also need someone who can work with
> >>> Infra to get us access to Kubernetes cluster(s), via whatever means.
> >>>
> >>> What do you think?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Nick & the HBase team at Apple
> >>>
> >>
>

Reply via email to