On 06/03/2018 13:27, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Hi Raoul and all,
> Sorry for joining this discussion late!
> I do not work on TripleO, but I'm part of the wider OpenStack
> sub-communities which focus on HA[0] and more recently,
> self-healing[1].  With that hat on, I'd like to suggest that maybe
> it's possible to collaborate on this in a manner which is agnostic to
> the deployment mechanism.  There is an open spec on this>    
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/443504/
> which was mentioned in the Denver PTG session on destructive testing
> which you referenced[2].
>    https://www.opnfv.org/community/projects/yardstick
> Currently each sub-community and vendor seems to be reinventing HA
> testing by itself to some extent, which is easier to accomplish in the
> short-term, but obviously less efficient in the long-term.  It would
> be awesome if we could break these silos down and join efforts! :-)

Hi Adam,
First of all thanks for your detailed answer. Then let me be honest
while saying that I didn't know yardstick. I need to start from scratch
here to understand what this project is. In any case, the exact meaning
of this thread is to involve people and have a more comprehensive look
at what's around.
The point here is that, as you can see from the tripleo-ha-utils spec
[1] I've created, the project is meant for TripleO specifically. On one
side this is a significant limitation, but on the other one, due to the
pluggable nature of the project, I think that integrations with other
software like you are proposing is not impossible.
Feel free to add your comments to the review. In the meantime, I'll
check yardstick to see which kind of bridge we can build to avoid
reinventing the wheel.

Thanks a lot again for your involvement,

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/548874/

Raoul Scarazzini

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to