Open Stack

On 06/25/2014 06:58 PM, Giulio Fidente wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 11:14 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
>> Excerpts from Gregory Haynes's message of 2014-06-16 14:04:19 -0700:
>>> Excerpts from Jan Provazník's message of 2014-06-16 20:28:29 +0000:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> MariaDB is now included in Fedora repositories, this makes it easier to
>>>> install and more stable option for Fedora installations. Currently
>>>> MariaDB can be used by including mariadb (use mariadb.org pkgs) or
>>>> mariadb-rdo (use redhat RDO pkgs) element when building an image. What
>>>> do you think about using MariaDB as default option for Fedora when
>>>> running devtest scripts?
>>
>> (first, I believe Jan means that MariaDB _Galera_ is now in Fedora)
>
> I think so too.
>
>>> Id like to give this a try. This does start to change us from being a
>>> deployment of openstck to being a deployment per distro but IMO thats a
>>> reasonable position.
>>>
>>> Id also like to propose that if we decide against doing this then these
>>> elements should not live in tripleo-image-elements.
>>
>> I'm not so sure I agree. We have lio and tgt because lio is on RHEL but
>> everywhere else is still using tgt IIRC.
>>
>> However, I also am not so sure that it is actually a good idea for people
>> to ship on MariaDB since it is not in the gate. As it diverges from MySQL
>> (starting in earnest with 10.x), there will undoubtedly be subtle issues
>> that arise. So I'd say having MariaDB get tested along with Fedora will
>> actually improve those users' test coverage, which is a good thing.
>
> I am favourable to the idea of switching to mariadb for fedora based
> distros.
>
> Currently the default mysql element seems to be switching [1], yet for
> ubuntu/debian only, from the percona provided binary tarball of mysql to
> the percona provided packaged version of mysql.
>
> In theory we could further update it to use percona provided packages of
> mysql on fedora too but I'm not sure there is much interest in using
> that combination where people gets mariadb and galera from the official
> repos.
>

IIRC fedora packages for percona xtradb cluster are not provided (unless 
something has changed recently).

> Using different defaults (and even drop support for one or another,
> depending on the distro), seems to me a better approach in the long term.
>
> Are there contrary opinions?
>
> 1. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/90134
>