[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Updates on containerized undercloud
emilien at redhat.com
Sun Mar 25 19:04:52 UTC 2018
This is an update on what has been achieved the last month with the regard
of Containerized Undercloud efforts in TripleO:
- Running OVB (ovs-ha, fs001) with a containerized undercloud: it finally
works, with some workarounds, all work in progress.
Results can be seen here:
List of workarounds/blockers:
* we need a new release of python-openstackclient that includes
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553374/ and therefore we need
* container workflow to be finished (sbaker is on it) (in the meantime
we're loading envs in quickstart).
* masquerading workaround: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553620 (long
term solution will be https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553427/ but still
Once we clear the workarounds/blockers and have a clean / stable
deployment, we'll switch featureset001 (ovb-ha) to deploy a containerized
undercloud. The target was end of rocky-m1 and we still aim for it.
- Running an CI job that test upgrades from a non containerized undercloud
on Queens to a containerized undercloud on Rocky. Work is in progress and
can be monitored here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553633/
Special thanks to the Upgrade squads who help a lot on that front!
## Upgrades support
We said we would provide a way to upgrade a non containerized undercloud to
a containerized undercloud by rocky-m1 and we still aim for it.
This is a demo of an upgrade from Queens (non containerized) to Rocky
We'll wait a bit for feedback from the demo and start documenting. Note
that most of the workflow remains the same as before (we still use
openstack undercloud upgrade command).
We'll also continue to push efforts to have this workflow tested by the CI
job in progress.
## Other items
- TripleO UI has been containerized.
- Routed networks is still in progress by Harald (we probably aim for
- We're investigating some way to validate than an upgrade to a
containerized undercloud worked fine (with Ansible?). More to come.
- Containerization of Tempest so we can run Tempest against a containerized
undercloud and also investigate how we could switch CI scenarios to be
deployed on one node.
- Port the TLS by default done in instack-undercloud.
Any feedback or help on testing is very welcome.
All efforts can be seen here: https://trello.com/b/nmGSNPoQ/containerized-
Thanks everyone who helped in these efforts so far!
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Emilien Macchi <emilien at redhat.com> wrote:
> This is an update on what has been achieved this week with the regard of
> Containerized Undercloud efforts in TripleO:
> TL;DR: really good efforts have been made and we can now deploy a full
> (multinode) overcloud in CI. OVB testing in progress and lot of remaining
> ## Bugfixes
> docker-registry: add missing firewall rules - https://review.openstack.
> mistral-executor: mount /var/lib/mistral - https://review.openstack.
> docker: configure group/user for deployment_user -
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/544761/ + dependencies
> Fix PublicVirtualFixedIPs in envs - https://review.openstack.
> Align zaqar max_messages_post_size with undercloud -
> undercloud_post: fix subnet name - https://review.openstack.
> ## CI
> We manage to run a containerized overcloud deployed by a containerized
> undercloud in CI, results can be seen here: https://review.
> The job is running on featureser010 now (for testing purpose) but as James
> mentioned in the review, we won't switch this job to run a containerized
> undercloud. Note there is no impact on the job runtime.
> We'll need to properly deprecate the non-containerized undercloud first
> but we'll need to find a CI job that we can use for gating, so we avoid
> regression during the cycle.
> Now we're working on deploying featureset001 (ovb-ha), with TLS, net-iso,
> Ironic/Nova/Neutron (baremetal bits) from a containerized undercloud:
> It's not working yet but we're working toward the blockers as they come
> during testing.
> # TLS Support
> All patches that were in progress have been merged, and now under testing
> in ovb-ha + containerized u/c (see above).
> # UI Support
> Work is still in progress, patches are ready for review, but some one them
> don't pass pep8 yet. We'll hopefully fix it soon.
> # Other items
> routed ctlplane networking: Harald is currently making progress on the
> items, some patches are ready for review.
> Create temp copy of tripleo-heat-templates before processing them: Bogdan
> is working on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/542875 - the patch is
> under review!
> Upgrades: no work has been started so far but we'll probably discuss about
> this topic during the PTG.
> As usual please comment or add anything that I missed.
> Thanks all for your help/reviews/efforts so far,
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:41 AM, Emilien Macchi <emilien at redhat.com>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 2:40 AM, Harald Jensås <hjensas at redhat.com>
>>> On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 14:39 -0800, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 2:30 PM, James Slagle <james.slagle at gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > [...]
>>> > > You may want to add an item for the routed ctlplane work that
>>> > > landed
>>> > > at the end of Queens. Afaik, that will need to be supported with
>>> > > the
>>> > > containerized undercloud.
>>> > Done: https://trello.com/c/kFtIkto1/17-routed-ctlplane-networking
>>> Tanks Emilien,
>>> I added several work items to the Trello card, and a few patches. Still
>>> Do we have any CI that use containerized undercloud with actual Ironic
>>> deployement? Or are they all using deployed-server?
>>> E.g do we have anything actually testing this type of change?
>>> I belive that would have to be an ovb job with containerized undercloud?
>> I'm working on it since last week: https://trello.com/c/uLq
>> But currently trying to make things stable again, we introduce
>> regressions and this is high prio now.
>> Emilien Macchi
> Emilien Macchi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev