1 - this is not a typo, this bug prevents the rest of the fix from finishing deployment, so a fix had to be included for the whole patch to remain testable. The primary bug makes Ceilometer deployment unreliable, so the're is not much point in separating the fixes.
2 - I had an iso build kicked off in MNV yesterday, I can share it when I get to the office. In addition to this patch, patched haproxy packages are required to build an ISO, there's OSCI build link in Jira. -DmitryB On Feb 10, 2014 10:06 PM, "Matthew Mosesohn" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dmitry, two questions: > 1 - How does this patch relate to > https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1278603 ? Is it a typo? It's > related to logging, not haproxy. > 2 - Is there an ISO already available for testing? > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko > <[email protected]> wrote: > > For the past few weeks, I've been working on a big refactoring of > > HAProxy related manifests in Fuel Library, and now I am finally > > satisfied with how these manifests work in Ubuntu and CentOS. > > > > It started as a fix for LP bug #1264388 and has brought up a long > > chain of problems that had to be resolved before the original problem > > could be addressed. The result is a massive 1318 line review request > > that completely rewrites the haproxy module (based on latest upstream > > version), refactors the haproxy parts of cluster and openstack > > modules, and touches osnailyfacter, galera, neutron, and ceilometer > > modules: > > > > https://review.openstack.org/65591 > > > > The primary purpose of this change is to make sure that HAProxy > > listening services can be enabled one at a time, after the > > corresponding backend service is configured and started (and releases > > the VIP if that's their default configuration), and before other > > services that require that service to be available via a VIP. The > > benefits are a more reliable and predictable HA deployment process, > > reduced coupling between our Puppet modules, and ability to put more > > services behind HAProxy without any impact on the core services. > > > > Please review this change and help me test it. See comments on the > > review for a list of configurations where this was tested, if this > > works for you in another configuration, please +1 and specify the > > configuration you used. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > Dmitry Borodaenko > > > > -- > > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev > > Post to : [email protected] > > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev > > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
