On 29.8.2017 17:12, Emilien Macchi wrote:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Jiří Stránský <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
the CI for containerized deployments with Pacemaker is close! In fact, it
works [1][2] (but there are pending changes to merge).
Really good news, thanks for the update!
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? [...]
I'm ok with the idea
No -1s yet, so i removed WIP status of [4].
as long as
gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-containers-multinode-upgrades-nv keep working
fine.
That's a different featureset so we can control it independently from
the basic deployment job. It might be good to switch this one to
Pacemaker too, if we can solve the current timeout issues and perhaps
have some spare wall time.
Non-pacemaker containers are still CI'd by OVB job, so the upgrade job
(currently still non-Pacemaker) shouldn't be more vulnerable even if we
switch the multinode job to Pacemaker.
Deploying Pacemaker on a single node environment is not optimal but
already cover a bunch of code which is good.
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?
It's actually a good start to our discussion at the PTG:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ptg-queens-ci-related-topics
(we have a session on Wednesday morning about CI topics, please make
sure you can join!)
I think in Queens, we'll run container-only jobs, even for OVB.
That said, I think OVB coverage in Queens will be very useful to try
HA with 3 controllers (containerized) and the baremetal services
coverage will only run on Pike, Ocata and Newton.
That way, we would have:
Queens:
- multinode jobs covering basic HA scenario, single node but still
useful to test a good part of the code
- OVB jobs covering production environment and hopefully spot issues
we wouldn't see with multinode jobs
Pike, Ocata, Newton:
no change on OVB job
(note it's a proposal, not a statement)
Yea focusing the CI changes towards containerized mainly on Queens+
could be fine too. The frequency of patches going into stable/pike will
be dropping as it gains stability, so time spent on CI enhancements
might indeed be better focused on Queens+. We can always adjust if that
doesn't prove to be the case.
[...]
[3] https://review.openstack.org/498474
approved
[...]
Thanks,
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
