Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Making the nonha-multinode and undercloud jobs voting

[Steven Hardy]

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:14:24PM -0400, James Slagle wrote:
> I've proposed:
> https://review.openstack.org/353019
> 
> which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and
> gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs.
> 
> I think these jobs have proven to be stable enough that we can promote
> them to be voting. If you have concerns, please vote on the patch. The
> nice thing about having these jobs voting is that jenkins will
> actually vote -1 on TripleO patches when these jobs fail.

While this is good news, I wanted to highlight that this breaks a pattern
we've been using to land code which is coupled between t-h-t and
puppet-tripleo, e.g:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/353637/

Which Depends-On:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/353582/

There is a circular dependency here, which previously wasn't a problem,
we'd ensure the t-h-t patch was all green then land both patches together.

This is no longer possible, so we will have to land t-h-t patches with
backwards compatibility hacks (or put these into puppet-tripleo), then land
the dependent patch, then land another patch to back out the hacks.

I guess this is consistent with what other projects do, but given our
relatively high number of intra-repo dependencies, it's a minor annoyance
to be aware of.

Cheers,

Steve

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Making the nonha-multinode and undercloud jobs voting

[Michele Baldessari]

Hi James,

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:43:58PM -0400, James Slagle wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Michele Baldessari  wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:14:24PM -0400, James Slagle wrote:
> >> I've proposed:
> >> https://review.openstack.org/353019
> >>
> >> which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and
> >> gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs.
> >
> > definitely +1 for the gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv job.
> > About the nonha job, I was actually wondering if we should still
> > keep any non-ha templates/jobs around now that the New HA architecture
> > has landed. I cannot think of any real usage and the NG HA stuff deploys
> > fine on 1 controller as well so the "develop on a smaller machine"
> > use-case is covered.
> >
> > Is there any reason/use-case to keep any non-ha templates/jobs around?
> > I'd love to remove them, but maybe there are some uses I have not
> > thought of ;)
> 
> I personally agree and think that we should consolidate our
> development and testing efforts onto the single NG pacemaker
> architecture and use that for both for non-HA and HA.
> 
> That being said, this needs to be driven via tripleo-heat-templates,
> tripleoclient, etc, instead of from the tripleo-ci side. E.g., once
> environments/puppet-pacemaker.yaml is the default environment in
> tripleo-heat-templates, then tripleo-ci will be using it automatically
> for nonha.

Ack. Sounds like a plan. I shall look into it.

Kind regards,
Michele
-- 
Michele Baldessari
C2A5 9DA3 9961 4FFB E01B  D0BC DDD4 DCCB 7515 5C6D

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Making the nonha-multinode and undercloud jobs voting

[Paul Belanger]

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:14:24PM -0400, James Slagle wrote:
> I've proposed:
> https://review.openstack.org/353019
> 
> which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and
> gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs.
> 
> I think these jobs have proven to be stable enough that we can promote
> them to be voting. If you have concerns, please vote on the patch. The
> nice thing about having these jobs voting is that jenkins will
> actually vote -1 on TripleO patches when these jobs fail.
> 
This is a big accomplishment for tripleo, it's a long time coming more job to
voting in the gate.  Everybody should be happy with this step.

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Making the nonha-multinode and undercloud jobs voting

[James Slagle]

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Michele Baldessari  wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:14:24PM -0400, James Slagle wrote:
>> I've proposed:
>> https://review.openstack.org/353019
>>
>> which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and
>> gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs.
>
> definitely +1 for the gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv job.
> About the nonha job, I was actually wondering if we should still
> keep any non-ha templates/jobs around now that the New HA architecture
> has landed. I cannot think of any real usage and the NG HA stuff deploys
> fine on 1 controller as well so the "develop on a smaller machine"
> use-case is covered.
>
> Is there any reason/use-case to keep any non-ha templates/jobs around?
> I'd love to remove them, but maybe there are some uses I have not
> thought of ;)
>
> Thanks,
> Michele
>
>> I think these jobs have proven to be stable enough that we can promote
>> them to be voting. If you have concerns, please vote on the patch. The
>> nice thing about having these jobs voting is that jenkins will
>> actually vote -1 on TripleO patches when these jobs fail.

I personally agree and think that we should consolidate our
development and testing efforts onto the single NG pacemaker
architecture and use that for both for non-HA and HA.

That being said, this needs to be driven via tripleo-heat-templates,
tripleoclient, etc, instead of from the tripleo-ci side. E.g., once
environments/puppet-pacemaker.yaml is the default environment in
tripleo-heat-templates, then tripleo-ci will be using it automatically
for nonha.

-- 
-- James Slagle
--

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Making the nonha-multinode and undercloud jobs voting

[James Slagle]

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:14 PM, James Slagle  wrote:
> I've proposed:
> https://review.openstack.org/353019
>
> which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and
> gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs.
>
> I think these jobs have proven to be stable enough that we can promote
> them to be voting. If you have concerns, please vote on the patch. The
> nice thing about having these jobs voting is that jenkins will
> actually vote -1 on TripleO patches when these jobs fail.

Note this also means the jobs will be gating as well. When patches are
approved, instead of just the normal set of linters/pep8/unit test
type jobs running, we will also be running the nonha-multinode job and
undercloud job. The nonha-multinode job is the longer of the 2 jobs
and is currently averaging 67 minutes fwiw.

-- 
-- James Slagle
--

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Making the nonha-multinode and undercloud jobs voting

[Michele Baldessari]

Hi James,

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:14:24PM -0400, James Slagle wrote:
> I've proposed:
> https://review.openstack.org/353019
> 
> which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and
> gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs.

definitely +1 for the gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv job.
About the nonha job, I was actually wondering if we should still
keep any non-ha templates/jobs around now that the New HA architecture
has landed. I cannot think of any real usage and the NG HA stuff deploys
fine on 1 controller as well so the "develop on a smaller machine"
use-case is covered.

Is there any reason/use-case to keep any non-ha templates/jobs around?
I'd love to remove them, but maybe there are some uses I have not
thought of ;)

Thanks,
Michele

> I think these jobs have proven to be stable enough that we can promote
> them to be voting. If you have concerns, please vote on the patch. The
> nice thing about having these jobs voting is that jenkins will
> actually vote -1 on TripleO patches when these jobs fail.
-- 
Michele Baldessari
C2A5 9DA3 9961 4FFB E01B  D0BC DDD4 DCCB 7515 5C6D

__
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

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Making the nonha-multinode and undercloud jobs voting

[James Slagle]

I've proposed:
https://review.openstack.org/353019

which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and
gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs.

I think these jobs have proven to be stable enough that we can promote
them to be voting. If you have concerns, please vote on the patch. The
nice thing about having these jobs voting is that jenkins will
actually vote -1 on TripleO patches when these jobs fail.

-- 
-- James Slagle
--

__
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