[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Pacemaker + containers CI

Giulio Fidente gfidente at redhat.com
Tue Aug 29 11:22:34 UTC 2017


On 08/29/2017 11:14 AM, Jiří Stránský wrote:
> Hi owls,
> 
> the CI for containerized deployments with Pacemaker is close! In fact, 
> it works [1][2] (but there are pending changes to merge).

cool :D

I also spotted this which we need for ceph 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/498356/

but I am not sure if we want to enable ceph in this job as we have it 
already in a couple of scenarios, more below ...

> The way it's proposed in gerrit currently is to switch the 
> centos-7-containers-multinode job (featureset010) to deploy with 
> Pacemaker. What do you think about making this switch as a first step? 
> (The OVB job is an option too, but that one is considerably closer to 
> timeouts already, so it may be better left as is.)

+1 on switching the existing job

> Later it would be nice to get a proper clustering test with 3 
> controllers. Should we try and switch the centos-7-ovb-ha-oooq job to 
> deploy containers on master and stable/pike? (Probably by adding a new 
> job that only runs on master + Pike, and making the old ovb-ha-oooq only 
> run upto Ocata, to keep the OVB capacity demands unchanged?) I'd be +1 
> on that since containers are the intended way of deploying Pike and 
> beyond. WDYT?

switching OVB to containers from pike seems fine because that's the 
indended way as you pointed, yet I would like to enable ceph in the 
upgrade job, and it requires multiple MON instances (multiple controllers)

would it make any sense to deploy the pacemaker / ceph combination using 
multiple controllers in the upgrade job and drop the standard ovb job 
(which doesn't do upgrade) or use it for other purposes?
-- 
Giulio Fidente
GPG KEY: 08D733BA



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list