Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-08-18 13:18:05 -0500: > On 08/18/2016 10:00 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > It's that time of year again to talk about killing this job, at least > > from the integrated gate (move it to experimental for people that care > > about postgresql, or make it gating on a smaller subset of projects like > > oslo.db). > > > > The postgresql job used to have three interesting things about it: > > > > 1. It ran keystone with eventlet (which is no longer a thing). > > 2. It runs the n-api-meta service rather than using config drive. > > 3. It uses postgresql for the database. > > > > So #1 is gone, and for #3, according to the April 2016 user survey (page > > 40) [1], 4% of reporting deployments are using it in production. > > > > I don't think we're running n-api-meta in any other integrated gate > > jobs, but I'm pretty sure there is at least one neutron job out there > > that's running with it that way. We could also consider making the > > nova-net dsvm full gate job run n-api-meta, or vice-versa with the > > neutron dsvm full gate job. > > > > We also have to consider that with HP public cloud being gone as a node > > provider and we've got fewer test nodes to run with, we have to make > > tough decisions about which jobs we're going to run in the integrated gate. > > > > I'm bringing this up again because Nova has a few more jobs it would > > like to make voting on it's repo (neutron LB and live migration, at > > least in the check queue) but there are concerns about adding yet more > > jobs that each change has to get through before it's merged, which means > > if anything goes wrong in any of those we can have a 24 hour turnaround > > on getting an approved change back through the gate. > > > > [1] > > https://www.openstack.org/assets/survey/April-2016-User-Survey-Report.pdf > > > > Perhaps a better option would be to get oslo.db to run cross-project > checks like we do in requirements. That way the right team is covering > the usage of postgres and we still have coverage while still lowering > gate load for most projects.
I would support functional test jobs, but if a project that uses oslo.db isn't going to also have the postgresql tests in place then something checked in there could possibly break the ability to land patches in oslo.db, so I don't think a one-directional "cross" project test job is a good idea. Doug __________________________________________________________________________ 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