Excerpts from Derek Higgins's message of 2014-08-20 09:06:48 +0000: > On 19/08/14 20:58, Gregory Haynes wrote: > > Excerpts from Giulio Fidente's message of 2014-08-19 12:07:53 +0000: > >> One last comment, maybe a bit OT but I'm raising it here to see what is > >> the other people opinion: how about we modify the -ha job so that at > >> some point we actually kill one of the controllers and spawn a second > >> user image? > > > > I think this is a great long term goal, but IMO performing an update > > isnt really the type of verification we want for this kind of test. We > > really should have some minimal tempest testing in place first so we can > > verify that when these types of failures occur our cloud remains in a > > functioning state. > > Greg, you said "performing an update" did you mean "killing a controller > node" ? > > if so I agree, verifying our cloud is still in a working order with > tempest would get us more coverage then spawning a node. So once we have > tempest in place we can add a test to kill a controller node. >
Ah, I misread the original message a bit, but sounds like were all on the same page. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
