[openstack-dev] [tripleo] tripleo upstream gate outtage, was: -> gate jobs impacted RAX yum mirror

Wesley Hayutin whayutin at redhat.com
Mon May 14 13:07:03 UTC 2018

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 11:30 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:

> On 2018-05-13 20:44:25 -0600 (-0600), Wesley Hayutin wrote:
> [...]
> > I do think it would be helpful to say have a one week change
> > window where folks are given the opportunity to preflight check a
> > new image and the potential impact on the job workflow the updated
> > image may have. If I could update or create a non-voting job w/
> > the new image that would provide two things.
> >
> > 1. The first is the head's up, this new minor version of centos is
> > coming into the system and you have $x days to deal with it.
> >
> > 2. The ability to build a few non-voting jobs w/ the new image to
> > see what kind of impact it has on the workflow and deployments.
> [...]
> While I can see where you're coming from, right now even the Infra
> team doesn't know immediately when a new CentOS minor release starts
> to be used. The packages show up in the mirrors automatically and
> images begin to be built with them right away. There isn't a
> conscious "switch" which is thrown by anyone. This is essentially
> the same way we treat Ubuntu LTS point releases as well. If this is
> _not_ the way RHEL/CentOS are intended to be consumed (i.e. just
> upgrade to and run the latest packages available for a given major
> release series) then we should perhaps take a step back and
> reevaluate this model.

I think you may be conflating the notion that ubuntu or rhel/cent can be
updated w/o any issues to applications that run atop of the distributions
with what it means to introduce a minor update into the upstream openstack
ci workflow.

If jobs could execute w/o a timeout the tripleo jobs would have not gone
red.  Since we do have constraints in the upstream like a timeouts and
others we have to prepare containers, images etc to work efficiently in the
upstream.  For example, if our jobs had the time to yum update the roughly
120 containers in play in each job the tripleo jobs would have just
worked.  I am not advocating for not having timeouts or constraints on
jobs, however I am saying this is an infra issue, not a distribution or
distribution support issue.

I think this is an important point to consider and I view it as mostly
unrelated to the support claims by the distribution.  Does that make sense?

> For now we have some fairly deep-driven
> assumptions in that regard which are reflected in the Linux
> distributions support policy of our project testing interface as
> documented in OpenStack governance.
> --
> Jeremy Stanley
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20180514/67031e0c/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list