On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> wrote: > So far in my testing I found 2 issues: > > - IPv6 + TLS doesn't work in tripleo-ci, certificates aren't good > (expected). We might need to generate new ones, I'll take a look > myself probably. > > http://logs.openstack.org/18/522618/2/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq-ipv6/d21046c/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/overcloud_deploy_post.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_20_59_28
I just found out there is a test-environments/enable-tls-ipv6.yaml - beautiful. Problem solved I guess. > - Running Tempest on OVB jobs with TLS doesn't work for me yet: > > http://logs.openstack.org/10/522310/6/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq/ad6c2c1/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/tempest_output.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_21_03_57 > Any help on that one is welcome > > Thanks, > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> wrote: >> I forgot to add an ongoing effort to reduce number of services >> deployed on ovb jobs at a strict minimum: >> https://review.openstack.org/522310 >> So we hope to run the job faster and more efficiently. Our scenarios >> already cover services like Cinder, Heat and Swift. We don't need them >> anymore on OVB. >> >> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> Queens's main theme is stabilization. >>> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we >>> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO >>> development. >>> >>> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high >>> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity. >>> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good >>> start. >>> >>> Now we have: >>> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics) >>> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud >>> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from >>> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates & >>> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to >>> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in >>> multinode scenario001/004 jobs. >>> >>> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2: >>> >>> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already >>> approved and change is being applied now: >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/ >>> indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting >>> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond. >>> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we >>> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/ >>> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6: >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/ >>> indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be >>> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6. >>> for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but >>> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome). >>> >>> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs: >>> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps) >>> - ovb-ha-ipv6 >>> >>> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode: >>> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow >>> - Introspection >>> - TLS >>> - Network Isolation >>> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6 >>> - Containerized overcloud >>> >>> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it >>> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less >>> resources consumed. >>> >>> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome, >>> -- >>> Emilien Macchi >> >> >> >> -- >> Emilien Macchi > > > > -- > Emilien Macchi -- Emilien Macchi __________________________________________________________________________ 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