Hello, As I work through the integration of these kustomize definitions into the existing java project structure that is hbase-operator-tools, I'm increasingly of the opinion that this is too much of a clash of concerns. I think that this contribution would make better sense as its own repository with its own release cycle. I'm neither aware of nor can I imagine a technical coupling between the kustomize resources and the rest of the utilities in operator-tools. Likewise, this change set introduces new requirements (docker, buildx, KinD and/or minikube) to the build and test environment that are not otherwise needed by operator-tools.
What do you think? SHould we request a new repository for the kustomize files? I propose hbase-kustomize.git. Thanks, Nick On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 4:33 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > I went ahead and rebuilt the Hadoop image module in the same style. I > rebased the zookeeper-single and hdfs kustimize implementations onto the > same structure. So, PR’s #118, #119, #120, and #121 are all in this style. > I don’t have a place for running integration tests, but unit tests are now > running in Jenkins. > > I appreciate any attention you can provide. > > Thanks, > Nick > > On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 16:02, TAK-LON WU <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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 >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
