Hi owls,
the CI for containerized deployments with Pacemaker is close! In fact,
it works [1][2] (but there are pending changes to merge).
The way it's proposed in gerrit currently is to switch the
centos-7-containers-multinode job (featureset010) to deploy with
Pacemaker. What do you think about making this switch as a first step?
(The OVB job is an option too, but that one is considerably closer to
timeouts already, so it may be better left as is.)
Later it would be nice to get a proper clustering test with 3
controllers. Should we try and switch the centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq job to
deploy containers on master and stable/pike? (Probably by adding a new
job that only runs on master + Pike, and making the old ovb-ha-oooq only
run upto Ocata, to keep the OVB capacity demands unchanged?) I'd be +1
on that since containers are the intended way of deploying Pike and
beyond. WDYT?
Have a good day,
Jirka
P.S. You can deploy containerized with pacemaker using OOOQ by setting
both `containerized_overcloud` and `enable_pacemaker` to true. Thanks to
Wes for collaboration on this.
P.P.S. The remaining patches are [3] and maybe [4] if we're ok with
switching centos-7-containers-multinode.
[1]
http://logs.openstack.org/24/471724/5/check/gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-containers-multinode/6330e5e/logs/subnode-2/var/log/pacemaker/bundles/
[2]
http://logs.openstack.org/24/471724/5/check/gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-containers-multinode/6330e5e/logs/subnode-2/var/log/extra/docker/containers/
[3] https://review.openstack.org/498474
[4] https://review.openstack.org/471724
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
