On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Alfredo Moralejo Alonso <amora...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:59 PM, 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. > > > We still have some multinode jobs running non-containerized deployment in > periodic pipeline (failing after https://review.openstack.org/#/c/518423/). > Should we remove these jobs?
Yes and sorry if we missed it. >> >> - 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 >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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