Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-21 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2017-03-21 13:34:50 -0400 (-0400), Paul Belanger wrote: [...] > Today RDO does snapshot images. [...] Worth pointing out, if it's using Nodepool to do that, support for snapshot images has been deprecated for a while and was dropped completely in the latest release(s?).

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-21 Thread Sagi Shnaidman
Paul, if we run 750 ovb jobs per day, than adding 12 more will be less than 2% increase. I don't believe it will be a serious issue. Thanks On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:40:39PM -0400, Wesley Hayutin wrote: > > On Tue,

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-21 Thread Paul Belanger
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:40:39PM -0400, Wesley Hayutin wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Paul Belanger > > wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 06:54:27PM +0200, Sagi Shnaidman

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-21 Thread Ben Nemec
On 03/21/2017 11:40 AM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Emilien Macchi > wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Paul Belanger > wrote: > On Sun, Mar 19,

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-21 Thread James Slagle
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: > Using tripleo-testcloud-rh2 I think is fine. I see a few folks recommending we use rh2, but AFAICT, it is already at capacity: [stack@undercloud ~]$ source overcloudrc [stack@undercloud ~]$ nova hypervisor-stats

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-21 Thread Wesley Hayutin
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Paul Belanger > wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 06:54:27PM +0200, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > >> Hi, Paul > >> I would say that real worthwhile try starts from

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-21 Thread Emilien Macchi
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 06:54:27PM +0200, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: >> Hi, Paul >> I would say that real worthwhile try starts from "normal" priority, because >> we want to run promotion jobs more *often*, not more

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-20 Thread Paul Belanger
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 06:54:27PM +0200, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > Hi, Paul > I would say that real worthwhile try starts from "normal" priority, because > we want to run promotion jobs more *often*, not more *rarely* which happens > with low priority. > In addition the initial idea in the first

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-20 Thread Ben Nemec
As another data point, from Wednesday to Friday last week rh1 ran at full capacity pretty much round the clock. There were experimental jobs that queued for at least 18 hours. Granted, this is a symptom of a capacity problem we've exacerbated by adding the containers OVB job, but even

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-19 Thread Sagi Shnaidman
Hi, Paul I would say that real worthwhile try starts from "normal" priority, because we want to run promotion jobs more *often*, not more *rarely* which happens with low priority. In addition the initial idea in the first mail was running them each after other almost, not once a day like it

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-15 Thread Paul Belanger
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:42:32PM -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: > > > On 03/13/2017 02:29 PM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > > Hi, all > > > > I submitted a change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/443964/ > > but seems like it reached a point which requires an additional discussion. > > > > I had a few

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-15 Thread Ben Nemec
On 03/13/2017 02:29 PM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: Hi, all I submitted a change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/443964/ but seems like it reached a point which requires an additional discussion. I had a few proposals, it's increasing period to 12 hours instead of 4 for start, and to leave it in

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-09 Thread Wesley Hayutin
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-03-07 10:12:58 -0500 (-0500), Wesley Hayutin wrote: > > The TripleO team would like to initiate a conversation about the > > possibility of creating a new pipeline in Openstack Infra to allow > > a set of jobs to

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-08 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2017-03-07 10:12:58 -0500 (-0500), Wesley Hayutin wrote: > The TripleO team would like to initiate a conversation about the > possibility of creating a new pipeline in Openstack Infra to allow > a set of jobs to run periodically every four hours [...] The request doesn't strike me as

[openstack-dev] [infra][tripleo] initial discussion for a new periodic pipeline

2017-03-07 Thread Wesley Hayutin
Greetings, The TripleO team would like to initiate a conversation about the possibility of creating a new pipeline in Openstack Infra to allow a set of jobs to run periodically every four hours [2]. The background and context of why such a pipeline is required is as follows. TripleO CI executes