Re: deleting docker images on nodes
OpenShift automatically prunes images off nodes and has done so since at least 3.4. Please see https://docs.okd.io/latest/admin_guide/garbage_collection.html On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 12:32 PM Tim Dudgeon wrote: > As time progresses more and more docker images will be present on the > nodes in a cluster as different pods get deployed. > This could use up significant disk space. > > Does openshift provide a mechanism for pruning these, or is doing this > up to the cluster administrator? > > ___ > users mailing list > users@lists.openshift.redhat.com > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users > ___ users mailing list users@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
deleting docker images on nodes
As time progresses more and more docker images will be present on the nodes in a cluster as different pods get deployed. This could use up significant disk space. Does openshift provide a mechanism for pruning these, or is doing this up to the cluster administrator? ___ users mailing list users@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
Re: Atomic Host support on OpenShift 3.11 and up
On Sep 25, 2018, at 6:22 AM, Joel Pearson wrote: Clayton, does this mean that in OpenShift 4.0 you'd be able to take a vanilla kubernetes installation and then install a bunch of OpenShift operators and basically have an OpenShift cluster? It’s not really the goal, since there are still admission plugins and patches in Kube-* binaries that are necessary to keep backward compatibility and round our multitenant security. Also, the top level operator will manage the control plane, which won’t work well if you don’t have a control plane or someone else installed it. Finally, node management will be a fully integrated part of 4.0, so many of the advantages of Red Hat CoreOS would be lost. That said, if you squint, yes, and we will certainly be doing things that make the separation clearer over time. Or is that not really the goal of migration to operators? Is it just to make future OpenShift releases easier to package? The goal is a fully managed update process that works at the click of a button, full node management on all cloud providers and metal, better and more dynamic cluster config (moving config to api objects you can kubectl apply post-install), and better future support for extending openshift with other ecosystem projects like istio and knative On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 9:18 AM Clayton Coleman wrote: > Master right now will be labeled 4.0 when 3.11 branches (happening right > now). It’s possible we might later cut a 3.12 but no plans at the current > time. > > Changes to master will include significant changes as the core is rewired > with operators - you’ll also see much more focus on preparing > openshift/installer and refractors in openshift-ansible that reduce its > scope as the hand-off to operators happens. Expect churn for the next > months. > > On Sep 6, 2018, at 6:23 PM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > Clayton, > > 4.0 is that going to be 3.12 rebranded (if we follow the current release > cycle) or 3.13 ? > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 2:34 PM Clayton Coleman > wrote: > >> The successor to atomic host will be RH CoreOS and the community >> variants. That is slated for 4.0. >> >> > On Sep 6, 2018, at 9:25 AM, Marc Ledent wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > I have read in the 3.10 release notes that Atomic Host is deprecated >> and will nod be supported starting release 3.11. >> > >> > What this means? Is it advisable to migrate all Atomic host vms to >> "standard" RHEL server? >> > >> > Kind regards, >> > Marc >> > >> > >> > ___ >> > users mailing list >> > users@lists.openshift.redhat.com >> > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users >> >> ___ >> users mailing list >> users@lists.openshift.redhat.com >> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users >> > ___ > users mailing list > users@lists.openshift.redhat.com > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users > ___ users mailing list users@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
Re: Atomic Host support on OpenShift 3.11 and up
Clayton, does this mean that in OpenShift 4.0 you'd be able to take a vanilla kubernetes installation and then install a bunch of OpenShift operators and basically have an OpenShift cluster? Or is that not really the goal of migration to operators? Is it just to make future OpenShift releases easier to package? On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 9:18 AM Clayton Coleman wrote: > Master right now will be labeled 4.0 when 3.11 branches (happening right > now). It’s possible we might later cut a 3.12 but no plans at the current > time. > > Changes to master will include significant changes as the core is rewired > with operators - you’ll also see much more focus on preparing > openshift/installer and refractors in openshift-ansible that reduce its > scope as the hand-off to operators happens. Expect churn for the next > months. > > On Sep 6, 2018, at 6:23 PM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > Clayton, > > 4.0 is that going to be 3.12 rebranded (if we follow the current release > cycle) or 3.13 ? > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 2:34 PM Clayton Coleman > wrote: > >> The successor to atomic host will be RH CoreOS and the community >> variants. That is slated for 4.0. >> >> > On Sep 6, 2018, at 9:25 AM, Marc Ledent wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > I have read in the 3.10 release notes that Atomic Host is deprecated >> and will nod be supported starting release 3.11. >> > >> > What this means? Is it advisable to migrate all Atomic host vms to >> "standard" RHEL server? >> > >> > Kind regards, >> > Marc >> > >> > >> > ___ >> > users mailing list >> > users@lists.openshift.redhat.com >> > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users >> >> ___ >> users mailing list >> users@lists.openshift.redhat.com >> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users >> > ___ > users mailing list > users@lists.openshift.redhat.com > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users > ___ users mailing list users@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
Re: IPv6
It looks like not, I found some references saying that Kubernetes has alpha support in 1.9 and some improvements in 1.10 https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/1443 https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/62822 I did find this article suggesting that you might be able to use project calico for IPv6 support, I don't know if that applies to 3.7 or not, but calico is quite a different network deployment though. https://www.projectcalico.org/enable-ipv6-on-kubernetes-with-project-calico/ On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:46 AM Diego Armando Ramirez Avelino < dramir...@ipn.mx> wrote: > IPv6 support for Openshift 3.7, is available? > > Greetings > -- > > -- > > La información de este correo así como la contenida en los documentos que > se adjuntan, pueden ser objeto de solicitudes de acceso a la información. > Visítanos: http://www.ipn.mx > ___ > users mailing list > users@lists.openshift.redhat.com > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users > ___ users mailing list users@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
