On Mon, 11 May 2015 17:16:09 -0600 Tim Flink <tfl...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2015 13:09:33 -0600 > Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, 9 May 2015 12:05:04 -0600 > > Tim Flink <tfl...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > This was brought up a little while ago and we decided to put off > > > the discussion a little bit but I'd like to re-start the > > > conversation before we get too much farther with disposable > > > clients. > > > > > > My plan for how our hosts would be set up once we deploy support > > > for disposable clients is this: > > > - virthosts would have N buildslave processes running on them > > > - each buildslave would launch VMs for disposable clients as > > > needed > > > - each virthost would have access to a shared filesystem used to > > > store at least VM images, maybe logs and other data > > > > Thats each virthost, not all virthosts having the same storage > > right? > > All of the virthosts (at least in each group of dev/stg/prod) would > have a chunk of shared storage used to store the canonical VM images > that we use to boot the disposable clients (the disk changes would be > done locally to the virthosts). This way we only have to build them > once instead of once per virthost. Would it be feasable to just build them once and rsync them between hosts? Or would you prefer shared storage? > In the back of my head, I'm thinking that it may make sense to store > logs and artifacts on a chunk of shared storage instead of > transferring everything to the taskotron master using buildbot. I > figure that may make sense if the shared storage is already set up but > this hasn't gotten past the "thinking about it" stage yet :). Yeah. We may be able to do a netapp nfs volume, we will have to see what all we can do once we move to our new c-mode filer. kevin
pgpZO08XzvIrK.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ qa-devel mailing list qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/qa-devel
