Open Stack

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:43 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:

> On 03/18/2014 08:15 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net
> > <mailto:sean at dague.net>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 03/18/2014 10:11 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >     > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 07:50:15AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> >     >> Hi Team,
> >     >>
> >     >> We have 2 choices
> >     >>
> >     >> 1) Upgrade to libvirt 0.9.8+ (See [1] for details)
> >     >> 2) Enable UCA and upgrade to libvirt 1.2.2+ (see [2] for details)
> >     >>
> >     >> For #1, we received a patched deb from @SergeHallyn/@JamesPage
> >     and ran
> >     >> tests on it in review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/79816/
> >     >> For #2, @SergeHallyn/@JamesPage have updated UCA
> >     >> ("precise-proposed/icehouse") repo and we ran tests on it in
> review
> >     >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/74889/
> >     >>
> >     >> For IceHouse, my recommendation is to request Ubuntu folks to
> >     push the
> >     >> patched 0.9.8+ version we validated to public repos, then we can
> can
> >     >> install/run gate jobs with that version. This is probably the
> >     smallest
> >     >> risk of the 2 choices.
> >     >
> >     > If we've re-run the tests in that review enough times to be
> confident
> >     > we've had a chance of exercising the race conditions, then using
> the
> >     > patched 0.9.8 seems like a no-brainer. We know the current version
> in
> >     > ubuntu repos is broken for us, so the sooner we address that the
> >     better.
> >
> >
> >
> > ++
> >
> >
> >     >
> >     >> As soon as Juno begins, we can switch 1.2.2+ on UCA and request
> >     Ubuntu
> >     >> folks to push the verified version where we can use it.
> >
> >
> > ++
> >
> >
> >     >
> >     > This basically re-raises the question of /what/ we should be
> >     testing in
> >     > the gate, which was discussed on this list a few weeks ago, and
> >     I'm not
> >     > clear that there was a definite decision in that thread
> >     >
> >     >
> >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027734.html
> >     >
> >     > Testing the lowest vs highest is targetting two different scenarios
> >     >
> >     >   - Testing the lowest version demonstrates that OpenStack has not
> >     >     broken its own code by introducing use of a new feature.
> >     >
> >     >   - Testing the highest version demonstrates that OpenStack has not
> >     >     been broken by 3rd party code introducing a regression.
> >     >
> >     > I think it is in scope for openstack to be targetting both of these
> >     > scenarios. For anything in-between though, it is upto the
> downstream
> >     > vendors to test their precise combination of versions. Currently
> >     though
> >     > our testing policy for non-python bits is "whatever version ubuntu
> >     ships",
> >     > which may be neither the lowest or highest versions, just some
> >     arbitrary
> >     > version they wish to support. So this discussion is currently more
> >     of a
> >     > 'what ubuntu version should we test on' kind of decision
> >
> >     I think testing 2 versions of libvirt in the gate is adding a matrix
> >     dimension that we currently can't really support. We're just going to
> >     have to pick one per release and be fine with it (at least for
> >     icehouse).
> >
> >     If people want other versions tested, please come in with 3rd party
> ci
> >     on it.
> >
> >     We can revisit the big test matrix at summit about the combinations
> >     we're going to actually validate, because with the various
> limitations
> >     we've got (concurrency limits, quota limits, upstream package limits,
> >     kinds of tests we want to run) we're going to have to make a bunch of
> >     compromises. Testing something new is going to require throwing
> existing
> >     stuff out of the test path.
> >
> >
> > I think this is definitely worth revisiting at the summit, but I think
> > we should move Juno to Libvirt 1.2.2+ as soon as possible instead of
> > gating on a 2 year old release, and at the summit we can sort out what
> > the full test matrix can be.
> >
> > As a side note tripleo uses libvirt from Saucy (1.1.1) so moving to
> > latest libvirt would help support them.
>
> Honestly, given that we've been trying to get a working UCA for 6
> months, I'm really not thrilled by the idea of making UCA part of our
> gate. Because it's clearly not at the same level of testing as the base
> distro. I think this will be even more so with UCA post 14.04 release,
> as that's designed as a transitional stage to get you to 14.04.
>
> As has been demonstrated, Canonical's testing systems are clearly not
> finding the same bugs we are finding in their underlying packages.
>
> I think the libvirt 1.2+ plan should be moving Juno to 14.04 as soon as
> we can get that stable. That will bring in a whole fresh OS, kernel,
> etc. And we recenter our testing on that LTS going forward.
>

Sounds like a good plan to me.


>
>         -Sean
>
> --
> Sean Dague
> Samsung Research America
> sean at dague.net / sean.dague at samsung.com
> http://dague.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140319/ae8e60e8/attachment.html>