On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Devananda van der Veen < devananda....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Eoghan Glynn <egl...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > Ignoring the question of is it ok to say: 'to run ceilometer in any > sort > >> > of > >> > non-trivial deployment you must manager yet another underlying > service, > >> > mongodb' I would prefer not adding an addition gate variant to all > >> > projects. > >> > With the effort to reduce the number of gate variants we have [0] I > >> > would > >> > prefer to see just ceilometer gate on both mongodb and sqlalchemy and > >> > the > >> > main integrated gate [1] pick just one. > >> > >> Just checking to see that I fully understand what you mean there, Joe. > >> > >> So would we: > >> > >> (a) add a new integrated-gate-ceilometer project-template to [1], > >> in the style of integrated-gate-neutron or integrated-gate-sahara, > >> which would replicate the main integrated-gate template but with > >> the addition of gate-tempest-dsvm-ceilometer-mongodb(-full) > >> > >> or: > >> > >> (b) simply move gate-tempest-dsvm-ceilometer-mongodb(-full) from > >> the experimental column[2] in the openstack-ceilometer project, > >> to the gate column on that project > >> > >> or: > >> > >> (c) something else > >> > >> Please excuse the ignorance of gate mechanics inherent in that question. > > > > > > > > Correct, AFAIK (a) or (b) would be sufficient. > > > > There is another option, which is make the mongodb version the default in > > integrated-gate and only run SQLA on ceilometer. > > > > Joe, > > I believe this last option is equivalent to making mongodb the > recommended implementation by virtue of suddenly being the most tested > implementation. I would prefer not to see that. > Agreed, I included this option for completeness. > > Eoghan, > > IIUC (and I am not an infra expert) I would suggest (b) since this > keeps the mongo tests within the ceilometer project only, which I > think is fine from a "what we test is what we recommend" standpoint. > > Also, if there is a situation where a change in Nova passes with > ceilometer+mysql and thus lands in Nova, but fails with > ceilometer+mongodb, yes, that would break the ceilometer project's > gate (but not the integrated gate). It would also indicate a > substantial abstraction violation within ceilometer. I have proposed > exactly this model for Ironic's deploy driver testing, and am willing > to accept the consequences within the project if we break our own > abstractions. > > Regards, > Devananda > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev