[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Forming our plans around Ansible
Fox, Kevin M
Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov
Mon Jul 10 20:59:31 UTC 2017
I think the migration path to something like kolla-kubernetes would be fine,
as you have total control over the orchestration piece, ansible and the config generation
ansible and since it is all containerized and TripleO production isn't, you should be able to
'upgrade' from non containtered to containered while leaving alone all the existing services as a
roll back path. Something like read in the old config, tweak it a bit as needed, upload as configmaps. then helm install some kolla packages?
From: Emilien Macchi [emilien at redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 12:14 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Forming our plans around Ansible
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Steven Hardy <shardy at redhat.com> wrote:
> 1. How to perform end-to-end configuration via ansible (outside of
> heat, but probably still using data and possibly playbooks generated
> by heat)
I guess we're talking about removing Puppet from TripleO and use more
Ansible to manage configuration files.
This is somewhat related to what Flavio (and team) are currently investigating:
Also see this thread for more context:
We could imagine these apb used by Split Stack 2 by applying the
software configuration (Ansible) to deploy OpenStack on already
deployed baremetal nodes.
One of the challenges here is how do we get the data from Heat to
generate Ansible vars.
>> I think if we can form some broad agreement before the PTG, we have a
>> chance at making some meaningful progress during Queens.
> Agreed, although we probably do need to make some more progress on
> some aspects of this for container minor updates that we'll need for
++ Thanks for bringing this James.
Some other thoughts:
* I also agree that TripleO Quickstart is a separated topic. I was
also confused why OOOQ was templating bash scripts and it has become
clear we needed a way to run exactly the commands in our documentation
without abstraction (please tell me if I'm wrong), therefore we had to
do these templates. We could have been a bit more granular (run cmds
in tasks instead of shell scripts) but I might have missed something
why we didn't do that way.
* Kayobe and Kolla are great tools, though TripleO is looking for a
path to migrate to Ansible in a backward compatible way. Throwing a
third grenade here - I think these tools are too opinionated to allow
us to simply use them. I think we should work toward re-using the
maximum of bits when it makes sense, but folks need to keep in mind we
need to support our existing production deployments, manage upgrades
etc. We're already using some bits from Kolla and our team is already
willing to collaborate with other deployments tools when it makes
* I agree with some comments in this thread when I read "TripleO would
be a tool to deploy OpenStack Infrastructure as split stacks", like
we're doing in our multinode jobs but even further. I'm interested by
the work done by Flavio and see how we could use Split Stack 2 to
deploy Kubernetes with Ansible (eventually without Mistral calling
Heat calling Mistral calling Ansible).
* It might sound like we want to add more complexity in TripleO but I
confirm James's goal which is a common goal in the team, is to reduce
the number of tools used by TripleO. In other words, we hope we can
e.g. remove Puppet to manage configuration files (which could be done
by Ansible), remove some workflows usually done by Heat but could be
done by Ansible as well, etc. The idea around forming plans to use
Ansible is excellent and we need to converge our efforts together so
we can address some of our operators's feedbacks.
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev