[openstack-dev] [cinder] Rolling upgrades - missing pieces
sean.mcginnis at gmx.com
Mon Oct 19 16:19:23 UTC 2015
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 03:10:16PM +0000, Dulko, Michal wrote:
> Hi all,
> One of our priority goals for Liberty was the adoption of
> oslo.versionedobjects in order for Cinder to achieve ability to do
> rolling upgrades. We weren't successful with that in L, and work got
> postponed to Mitaka. I want to highlight remaining work in that topic as
> well as other pieces that are still missing in order for Cinder to
> support no-downtime-upgrades.
> Changing this is required for us to be able to remove or rename fields
> in these dictionaries and still be able to provide interoperability of
> services working in different versions.
> I would love to get some feedback on these thoughts and possibly start a
> pre-summit discussion on the whole topic.
Thanks for bringing this up Michal. Will you be around for the weekly
meeting this week? It would be great if we could get this on the agenda
just to make sure everyone is aware of it.
That may help to make sure more folks have had a chance to think about
this, even briefly, before the design summit.
>  http://www.danplanet.com/blog/2015/10/05/upgrades-in-nova-rpc-apis/
>  http://www.danplanet.com/blog/2015/10/06/upgrades-in-nova-objects/
>  http://www.danplanet.com/blog/2015/10/07/upgrades-in-nova-database-migrations/
>  https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/db/test_migrations.py#L186-L227
>  http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/kilo/approved/online-schema-changes.html
>  https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/cinder+branch:master+topic:bp/cinder-objects,n,z
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev