On 08/29/2017 11:14 AM, Jiří Stránský wrote:
Hi owls,
the CI for containerized deployments with Pacemaker is close! In fact,
it works [1][2] (but there are pending changes to merge).
cool :D
I also spotted this which we need for ceph
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/498356/
but I am not sure if we want to enable ceph in this job as we have it
already in a couple of scenarios, more below ...
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.)
+1 on switching the existing job
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?
switching OVB to containers from pike seems fine because that's the
indended way as you pointed, yet I would like to enable ceph in the
upgrade job, and it requires multiple MON instances (multiple controllers)
would it make any sense to deploy the pacemaker / ceph combination using
multiple controllers in the upgrade job and drop the standard ovb job
(which doesn't do upgrade) or use it for other purposes?
--
Giulio Fidente
GPG KEY: 08D733BA
__________________________________________________________________________
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
