[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Deployment workflow changes for ui/client
jtomasek at redhat.com
Tue Oct 24 10:04:53 UTC 2017
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Brad P. Crochet <brad at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:56 PM James Slagle <james.slagle at gmail.com>
>> I've been looking at how we can hook up the deployment changes for
>> config-download with the existing deployment workflows in Mistral.
>> However, it seems we have not sufficiently abstracted the logic to do
>> a "deployment" behind a given workflow(s). The existing things a
>> client (or UI) has to do is:
>> - call tripleo.deployment.v1.deploy_plan
>> - poll for success/failure of that workflow
>> - poll for success/failure of in progress Heat stack (list events, etc)
>> - call tripleo.deployment.v1.overcloudrc
>> (probably more things too)
>> If I want to make some changes to the deployment workflow, such that
>> after the Heat stack operation is complete, we run a config-download
>> action/workflow, then apply the generated ansible via
>> ansible-playbook, I can't really do that without requiring all clients
>> to also get updated to use those new steps (via calling new workflows,
>> As a first attempt, I took a shot at creating a workflow that does every
>> But even that will require client changes as it necessitates a
>> behavior change in that the workflow has to wait for the stack to be
>> complete as opposed to returning as soon as the stack operation is
>> accepted by Heat.
> Thankfully we already have that capability. :)
>> I'd like to implement this in a way that minimizes the impact of
>> changes on both python-tripleoclient and tripleo-ui, but it's looking
>> as if some changes would be required to use this new ansible driven
>> Thoughts or feedback on how to proceed? I'm guess I'm also wondering
>> if the existing API exposed by the workflows is easy to consume by the
>> UI, or if it would be better to be wrapped in a single workflow...at
>> least that way we could make logical implementation changes without
>> requiring ui/cilent changes.
>>  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/ansible-
> +1 to all of this. I think from the CLI perspective, it should be a
> minimal impact. If anything, it will get rid of a lot of code that doesn't
> really belong. I can't say what the impact to the UI would be. However, one
> thing that we should make sure of is that we send messages back through
> Zaqar to keep the CLI and UI informed of what is occurring. That should
> happen already with most of the existing workflows.
> This is a great step in the right direction. The Workflows squad will be
> happy to assist in any way we can. We will start by reviewing what you have
> so far.
Having a workflow which wraps whole deployment sounds great from the UI
side too as it allows us to simplify the steps you described above. IIRC
the reason the whole deployment did not get wrapped into a single workflow
before is that the workflow/tasks timeouted before the deployment could
finish which caused the workflow to fail.
It should not be problematic to integrate these changes in GUI. The soon we
can test it the better. As Brad noted, it is important to get as many Zaqar
messages as possible so we can track the progress properly.
>> -- James Slagle
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:
> Brad P. Crochet, RHCA, RHCE, RHCVA, RHCDS
> Principal Software Engineer
> (c) 704.236.9385 <(704)%20236-9385>
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev