On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Alex Schultz wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Emilien Macchi
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 3:30 AM, James Slagle
>> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Emilien Macchi
>> wro
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Alex Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 3:30 AM, James Slagle
> wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Emilien Macchi
> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> >>> [...
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 3:30 AM, James Slagle wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
-CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:07 PM, James Slagle wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> > Yes. Thanks for reformulate with better words.
> > Just to be clear, I want to transform the scenarios into single-node
> > jobs that deploy the SAME services (using composable service
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> Yes. Thanks for reformulate with better words.
> Just to be clear, I want to transform the scenarios into single-node
> jobs that deploy the SAME services (using composable services) from
> the undercloud, using the new ansible installer. I a
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 3:30 AM, James Slagle wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> -CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we received
>>> feedback from the OpenStack infrastructure team
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> [...]
>
>> -CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we received
>> feedback from the OpenStack infrastructure team that our upstream CI
>> resource usage is quite high at time
I took an action to remove scenarios/baremetal jobs on pike/master:
https://review.openstack.org/518210
I think it's a good step forward cleaning things up and saving CI resources.
I also think we should keep one multinode/baremetal job on pike (and
probably ovb), and kill all baremetal jobs in ma
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote:
>>
>> On 11/6/17 1:01 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
-CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote:
> On 11/6/17 1:01 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> -CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we received
>>> feedback from the OpenStack infrastructure team that ou
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote:
> On 11/6/17 1:01 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> -CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we received
>>> feedback from the OpenStack infrastructure team that o
On 11/6/17 1:01 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
[...]
-CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we received
feedback from the OpenStack infrastructure team that our upstream CI
resource usage is quite high at times (even as high as 50%
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> [...]
>
> > -CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we received
> > feedback from the OpenStack infrastructure team that our upstream CI
> > resource usage is quite high at
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
[...]
> -CI resources: better use of CI resources. At the PTG we received
> feedback from the OpenStack infrastructure team that our upstream CI
> resource usage is quite high at times (even as high as 50% of the
> total). Because of the shared f
út 17. 10. 2017 v 17:14 odesílatel Dan Prince napsal:
> On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 11:46 +, milanisko k wrote:
> >
> > How about the shared container? Wouldn't it be better not have to
> > rely on t-h-t especially if we're "scheduling" (and probably
> > configuring) the services as a single logica
On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 11:46 +, milanisko k wrote:
>
> How about the shared container? Wouldn't it be better not have to
> rely on t-h-t especially if we're "scheduling" (and probably
> configuring) the services as a single logical entity?
The containers architecture for Pike and Queens is ve
út 17. 10. 2017 v 13:06 odesílatel Dan Prince napsal:
> On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 10:06 +, milanisko k wrote:
> >
> > Does it mean dnsmasq was run from a stand-alone container?
>
> Yes. There are separate containers for the ironic-inspector and
> dnsmasq.
>
> >
> > Could you please point me (in t
On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 10:06 +, milanisko k wrote:
>
> Does it mean dnsmasq was run from a stand-alone container?
Yes. There are separate containers for the ironic-inspector and
dnsmasq.
>
> Could you please point me (in the patch probably) to the spot where
> we configure inspector containe
Hi Dan!
thanks for the testing! I've got couple of questions...
po 16. 10. 2017 v 20:04 odesílatel Dan Prince napsal:
> On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 15:10 +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> > (top-posting, as it is not a direct response to a specific line)
> >
> > This is your friendly reminder that we'r
On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 15:10 +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> (top-posting, as it is not a direct response to a specific line)
>
> This is your friendly reminder that we're not quite near
> containerized
> ironic-inspector. The THT for it has probably never been tested at
> all, and the
> iptables
On 10/3/17 10:46 PM, Dan Prince wrote:
>
>
> This reduces our complexity greatly I think in that once it is completed
> will allow us to eliminate two project (instack and instack-undercloud)
> and the maintenance thereof. Furthermore, as this dovetails nice with
> the Ansible
>
>
> IMHO
[dpri...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2017 9:50 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] containerized undercloud in Queens
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Dmitry Tantsur
mailto:dtant...@redhat.com>> wrote
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> (top-posting, as it is not a direct response to a specific line)
>
> This is your friendly reminder that we're not quite near containerized
> ironic-inspector. The THT for it has probably never been tested at all, and
> the iptables magic we
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 16:03 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Dan Prince
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Alex Schultz
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Dan Prince
>>
(top-posting, as it is not a direct response to a specific line)
This is your friendly reminder that we're not quite near containerized
ironic-inspector. The THT for it has probably never been tested at all, and the
iptables magic we do may simply not be containers-compatible. Milan would
appr
On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 16:03 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Dan Prince
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Alex Schultz
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Dan Prince
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 15:20 -0600, Alex
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Dan Prince wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Alex Schultz wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 15:20 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote:
>> >> Hey Dan,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for sending out a note about this. I
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Alex Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> > On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 15:20 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote:
> >> Hey Dan,
> >>
> >> Thanks for sending out a note about this. I have a few questions
> >> inline.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Alex Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>> On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 15:20 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote:
>>> Hey Dan,
>>>
>>> Thanks for sending out a note about this. I have a few questions
>>> inline.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:02
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 15:20 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote:
>> Hey Dan,
>>
>> Thanks for sending out a note about this. I have a few questions
>> inline.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Dan Prince
>> wrote:
>> > One of the things the TripleO c
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
[...]
> I would let other chime in but the feedback I've gotten has mostly been
> that it improves the dev/test cycle greatly.
[...]
I like both aschultz & dprince thoughts here, I agree with both of you
on most of the points made here.
I think
On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 15:20 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote:
> Hey Dan,
>
> Thanks for sending out a note about this. I have a few questions
> inline.
>
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Dan Prince
> wrote:
> > One of the things the TripleO containers team is planning on
> > tackling
> > in Queens is
Hey Dan,
Thanks for sending out a note about this. I have a few questions inline.
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> One of the things the TripleO containers team is planning on tackling
> in Queens is fully containerizing the undercloud. At the PTG we created
> an etherpad [1]
One of the things the TripleO containers team is planning on tackling
in Queens is fully containerizing the undercloud. At the PTG we created
an etherpad [1] that contains a list of features that need to be
implemented to fully replace instack-undercloud.
Benefits of this work:
-Alignment: align
34 matches
Mail list logo
