Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] upstream OVB jobs - roadmap

2017-12-02 Thread Emilien Macchi 
Quick update on this topic:

- ovb-ha is now running a strict minimum of services (Glance,
Keystone, Nova, Neutron, Swift) and executes Tempest.
- ovb-ha-ipv6 now works! patches are ready for review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:fs035+status:open
  the job deploy ipv6 network isolation, introspection, pacemaker on 3
controllers, containerized overcloud, TLS and it runs Tempest (shiny
eh?).

Thanks a lot to Sagi, Juan and reviewers who helped to make that effort.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>>> So far in my testing I found 2 issues:
>>>
>>> - IPv6 + TLS doesn't work in tripleo-ci, certificates aren't good
>>> (expected). We might need to generate new ones, I'll take a look
>>> myself probably.
>>>   
>>> http://logs.openstack.org/18/522618/2/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq-ipv6/d21046c/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/overcloud_deploy_post.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_20_59_28
>>
>> I just found out there is a test-environments/enable-tls-ipv6.yaml -
>> beautiful. Problem solved I guess.
>>
>>> - Running Tempest on OVB jobs with TLS doesn't work for me yet:
>>>   
>>> http://logs.openstack.org/10/522310/6/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq/ad6c2c1/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/tempest_output.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_21_03_57
>>>   Any help on that one is welcome
>
> I sent https://review.openstack.org/522677 which I think is the way to
> go, any feedback is welcome.
>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
 I forgot to add an ongoing effort to reduce number of services
 deployed on ovb jobs at a strict minimum:
 https://review.openstack.org/522310
 So we hope to run the job faster and more efficiently. Our scenarios
 already cover services like Cinder, Heat and Swift. We don't need them
 anymore on OVB.

 On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Emilien Macchi  
 wrote:
> Queens's main theme is stabilization.
> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
> development.
>
> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good 
> start.
>
> Now we have:
> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
> multinode scenario001/004 jobs.
>
> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:
>
> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
> approved and change is being applied now:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
>   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
>   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
>   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).
>
> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
> - ovb-ha-ipv6
>
> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
> - Introspection
> - TLS
> - Network Isolation
> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
> - Containerized overcloud
>
> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
> resources consumed.
>
> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
> --
> Emilien Macchi



 --
 Emilien Macchi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Emilien Macchi
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>
>
>
> --
> Emilien Macchi



-- 
Emilien Macchi

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] upstream OVB jobs - roadmap

2017-11-27 Thread Emilien Macchi 
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Alfredo Moralejo Alonso
 wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>>
>> Queens's main theme is stabilization.
>> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
>> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
>> development.
>>
>> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
>> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
>> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good
>> start.
>>
>> Now we have:
>> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
>> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
>> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
>> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
>> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
>> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
>> multinode scenario001/004 jobs.
>>
>> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:
>>
>> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
>> approved and change is being applied now:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
>>   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
>> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
>
>
> We still have some multinode jobs running non-containerized deployment in
> periodic pipeline (failing after https://review.openstack.org/#/c/518423/).
> Should we remove these jobs?

Yes and sorry if we missed it.

>>
>> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
>> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
>> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
>>   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
>> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
>>   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
>> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).
>>
>> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
>> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
>> - ovb-ha-ipv6
>>
>> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
>> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
>> - Introspection
>> - TLS
>> - Network Isolation
>> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
>> - Containerized overcloud
>>
>> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
>> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
>> resources consumed.
>>
>> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>>
>> __
>> 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 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
>



-- 
Emilien Macchi

__
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] upstream OVB jobs - roadmap

2017-11-27 Thread Alfredo Moralejo Alonso 
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:

> Queens's main theme is stabilization.
> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
> development.
>
> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good
> start.
>
> Now we have:
> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
> multinode scenario001/004 jobs.
>
> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:
>
> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
> approved and change is being applied now:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
>   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
>

We still have some multinode jobs running non-containerized deployment in
periodic pipeline (failing after https://review.openstack.org/#/c/518423/).
Should we remove these jobs?


> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
>   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
>   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).
>
> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
> - ovb-ha-ipv6
>
> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
> - Introspection
> - TLS
> - Network Isolation
> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
> - Containerized overcloud
>
> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
> resources consumed.
>
> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
> --
> Emilien Macchi
>
> __
> 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 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] upstream OVB jobs - roadmap

2017-11-23 Thread Emilien Macchi 
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>> So far in my testing I found 2 issues:
>>
>> - IPv6 + TLS doesn't work in tripleo-ci, certificates aren't good
>> (expected). We might need to generate new ones, I'll take a look
>> myself probably.
>>   
>> http://logs.openstack.org/18/522618/2/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq-ipv6/d21046c/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/overcloud_deploy_post.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_20_59_28
>
> I just found out there is a test-environments/enable-tls-ipv6.yaml -
> beautiful. Problem solved I guess.
>
>> - Running Tempest on OVB jobs with TLS doesn't work for me yet:
>>   
>> http://logs.openstack.org/10/522310/6/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq/ad6c2c1/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/tempest_output.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_21_03_57
>>   Any help on that one is welcome

I sent https://review.openstack.org/522677 which I think is the way to
go, any feedback is welcome.

>> Thanks,
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>>> I forgot to add an ongoing effort to reduce number of services
>>> deployed on ovb jobs at a strict minimum:
>>> https://review.openstack.org/522310
>>> So we hope to run the job faster and more efficiently. Our scenarios
>>> already cover services like Cinder, Heat and Swift. We don't need them
>>> anymore on OVB.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
 Queens's main theme is stabilization.
 That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
 can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
 development.

 One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
 demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
 To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good 
 start.

 Now we have:
 - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
 - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
 - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
 ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
 ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
 tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
 multinode scenario001/004 jobs.

 That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:

 - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
 approved and change is being applied now:
 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
 non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
 - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
 have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
 - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
 tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
 I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).

 At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
 - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
 - ovb-ha-ipv6

 Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
 - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
 - Introspection
 - TLS
 - Network Isolation
 - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
 - Containerized overcloud

 As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
 needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
 resources consumed.

 Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
 --
 Emilien Macchi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Emilien Macchi
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>
>
>
> --
> Emilien Macchi



-- 
Emilien Macchi

__
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] upstream OVB jobs - roadmap

2017-11-23 Thread Emilien Macchi 
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
> So far in my testing I found 2 issues:
>
> - IPv6 + TLS doesn't work in tripleo-ci, certificates aren't good
> (expected). We might need to generate new ones, I'll take a look
> myself probably.
>   
> http://logs.openstack.org/18/522618/2/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq-ipv6/d21046c/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/overcloud_deploy_post.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_20_59_28

I just found out there is a test-environments/enable-tls-ipv6.yaml -
beautiful. Problem solved I guess.

> - Running Tempest on OVB jobs with TLS doesn't work for me yet:
>   
> http://logs.openstack.org/10/522310/6/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq/ad6c2c1/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/tempest_output.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_21_03_57
>   Any help on that one is welcome
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>> I forgot to add an ongoing effort to reduce number of services
>> deployed on ovb jobs at a strict minimum:
>> https://review.openstack.org/522310
>> So we hope to run the job faster and more efficiently. Our scenarios
>> already cover services like Cinder, Heat and Swift. We don't need them
>> anymore on OVB.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>>> Queens's main theme is stabilization.
>>> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
>>> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
>>> development.
>>>
>>> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
>>> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
>>> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good 
>>> start.
>>>
>>> Now we have:
>>> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
>>> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
>>> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
>>> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
>>> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
>>> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
>>> multinode scenario001/004 jobs.
>>>
>>> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:
>>>
>>> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
>>> approved and change is being applied now:
>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
>>>   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
>>> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
>>> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
>>> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
>>> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
>>>   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
>>> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
>>>   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
>>> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).
>>>
>>> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
>>> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
>>> - ovb-ha-ipv6
>>>
>>> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
>>> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
>>> - Introspection
>>> - TLS
>>> - Network Isolation
>>> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
>>> - Containerized overcloud
>>>
>>> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
>>> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
>>> resources consumed.
>>>
>>> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
>>> --
>>> Emilien Macchi
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>
>
>
> --
> Emilien Macchi



-- 
Emilien Macchi

__
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] upstream OVB jobs - roadmap

2017-11-23 Thread Emilien Macchi 
So far in my testing I found 2 issues:

- IPv6 + TLS doesn't work in tripleo-ci, certificates aren't good
(expected). We might need to generate new ones, I'll take a look
myself probably.
  
http://logs.openstack.org/18/522618/2/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq-ipv6/d21046c/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/overcloud_deploy_post.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_20_59_28

- Running Tempest on OVB jobs with TLS doesn't work for me yet:
  
http://logs.openstack.org/10/522310/6/check-tripleo/tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq/ad6c2c1/logs/undercloud/home/zuul/tempest_output.log.txt.gz#_2017-11-23_21_03_57
  Any help on that one is welcome

Thanks,

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
> I forgot to add an ongoing effort to reduce number of services
> deployed on ovb jobs at a strict minimum:
> https://review.openstack.org/522310
> So we hope to run the job faster and more efficiently. Our scenarios
> already cover services like Cinder, Heat and Swift. We don't need them
> anymore on OVB.
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
>> Queens's main theme is stabilization.
>> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
>> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
>> development.
>>
>> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
>> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
>> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good 
>> start.
>>
>> Now we have:
>> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
>> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
>> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
>> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
>> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
>> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
>> multinode scenario001/004 jobs.
>>
>> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:
>>
>> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
>> approved and change is being applied now:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
>>   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
>> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
>> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
>> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
>> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
>>   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
>> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
>>   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
>> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).
>>
>> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
>> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
>> - ovb-ha-ipv6
>>
>> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
>> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
>> - Introspection
>> - TLS
>> - Network Isolation
>> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
>> - Containerized overcloud
>>
>> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
>> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
>> resources consumed.
>>
>> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>
>
>
> --
> Emilien Macchi



-- 
Emilien Macchi

__
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] upstream OVB jobs - roadmap

2017-11-23 Thread Emilien Macchi 
I forgot to add an ongoing effort to reduce number of services
deployed on ovb jobs at a strict minimum:
https://review.openstack.org/522310
So we hope to run the job faster and more efficiently. Our scenarios
already cover services like Cinder, Heat and Swift. We don't need them
anymore on OVB.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
> Queens's main theme is stabilization.
> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
> development.
>
> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good start.
>
> Now we have:
> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
> multinode scenario001/004 jobs.
>
> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:
>
> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
> approved and change is being applied now:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
>   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
>   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
>   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).
>
> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
> - ovb-ha-ipv6
>
> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
> - Introspection
> - TLS
> - Network Isolation
> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
> - Containerized overcloud
>
> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
> resources consumed.
>
> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
> --
> Emilien Macchi



-- 
Emilien Macchi

__
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