Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][Heat] reverting the HOT migration? // dealing with lockstep changes
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > On 13 August 2014 11:05, Robert Collins wrote: > >> I've reproduced the problem with zane's fix for the validation error - >> and it does indeed still break: >> "| stack_status_reason | StackValidationFailed: Property error : >> NovaCompute6: >> | | key_name Value must be a string >> >> >> " > > Filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1356097 to track this. > > Since this makes it impossible to upgrade a pre-HOT-migration merged > stack, I'm going to push forward on toggling back to non-HOT, at least > until we can figure out whether this is a shallow or deep problem in > Heat. (Following our 'rollback then fix' stock approach to issues). The backwards compatibility spec is yet to be approved. This is partly the reason why i pushed for the stable branches last cycle -- because TripleO has no backwards compatibility guarantee (yet). Regardless, I'd hate to see the migration to HOT reverted. That will cause a lot of churn on folks. Especially on the parts of the Tuskar work that are depending on this migration. And then the disruption on everyone again when we try to merge it next time. I think working through the Heat bugs is less churn. Steve Baker proposed a fix for the latest issue: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113739/ but it's marked WIP. I'd rather push on getting these fixes merged vs. reverting. Since we actually don't know if it's a shallow vs. deep problem, let's not assume deep and automatically cause a bunch of churn for everyone. -- -- James Slagle -- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][Heat] reverting the HOT migration? // dealing with lockstep changes
On 13 August 2014 11:05, Robert Collins wrote: > I've reproduced the problem with zane's fix for the validation error - > and it does indeed still break: > "| stack_status_reason | StackValidationFailed: Property error : > NovaCompute6: > | | key_name Value must be a string > > > " Filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1356097 to track this. Since this makes it impossible to upgrade a pre-HOT-migration merged stack, I'm going to push forward on toggling back to non-HOT, at least until we can figure out whether this is a shallow or deep problem in Heat. (Following our 'rollback then fix' stock approach to issues). -Rob -- Robert Collins Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][Heat] reverting the HOT migration? // dealing with lockstep changes
On 12 August 2014 10:46, Robert Collins wrote: > On 12 August 2014 07:24, Dan Prince wrote: >> On Tue, 2014-08-12 at 06:58 +1200, Robert Collins wrote: >>> Hi, so shortly after the HOT migration landed, we hit >>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1354305 which is that on even >>> quite recently deployed clouds, the migrated templates were just too >>> new. A partial revert (of just the list_join bit) fixes that, but a >>> deeper problem emerged which is that stack-update to get from a >>> non-HOT to HOT template appears broken >>> (https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1354962). >>> >>> I think we need to revert the HOT migration today, as forcing a >>> scorched earth recreation of a cloud is not a great answer for folk >>> that have deployed versions - its a backwards compat issue. >>> >>> Its true that our release as of icehouse isn't really useable, so we >>> could try to wiggle our way past this one, but I think as the first >>> real test of our new backwards compat policy, that that would be a >>> mistake. >> >> Hmmm. We blocked a good bit of changes to get these HOT templates in so >> I hate to see us revert them. Also, It isn't clear to me how much work >> it would be to fully support the non-HOT to HOT templates upgrade path. >> How much work is this? And is that something we really want to spend >> time on instead of all the other things? > > Following up with Heat folk, apparently the non-HOT->HOTness was a > distraction - I'll validate this on the hp1 region asap, since I too > would rather not revert stuff. I've reproduced the problem with zane's fix for the validation error - and it does indeed still break: "| stack_status_reason | StackValidationFailed: Property error : NovaCompute6: | | key_name Value must be a string " > We may need to document a two-step upgrade process for the UC - step 1 > upgrade the UC image, *same* template, step 2, use new template to get > new functionality. ... once we can actually do the stack update at all :). -Rob -- Robert Collins Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][Heat] reverting the HOT migration? // dealing with lockstep changes
On 12 August 2014 10:27, Zane Bitter wrote: > On 11/08/14 15:24, Dan Prince wrote: >> >> Hmmm. We blocked a good bit of changes to get these HOT templates in so >> I hate to see us revert them. Also, It isn't clear to me how much work >> it would be to fully support the non-HOT to HOT templates upgrade path. >> How much work is this? And is that something we really want to spend >> time on instead of all the other things? > > > The fix in Heat is going through the gate as we speak, if that helps: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112936/ > > (BTW it would be great if threads about critical bugs in Heat had [Heat] in > the subject - I almost missed this one.) Sorry, was thinking this was more a TripleO issue - but I'm glad its a shallow heat issue instead :) -Rob -- Robert Collins Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][Heat] reverting the HOT migration? // dealing with lockstep changes
On 11/08/14 15:24, Dan Prince wrote: Hmmm. We blocked a good bit of changes to get these HOT templates in so I hate to see us revert them. Also, It isn't clear to me how much work it would be to fully support the non-HOT to HOT templates upgrade path. How much work is this? And is that something we really want to spend time on instead of all the other things? The fix in Heat is going through the gate as we speak, if that helps: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112936/ (BTW it would be great if threads about critical bugs in Heat had [Heat] in the subject - I almost missed this one.) cheers, Zane. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
