[openstack-dev] [TripleO] [CI] Cinder/Ceph CI setup

Derek Higgins derekh at redhat.com
Thu Nov 27 13:23:06 UTC 2014

On 27/11/14 10:21, Duncan Thomas wrote:
> I'd suggest starting by making it an extra job, so that it can be
> monitored for a while for stability without affecting what is there.

we have to be careful here, adding an extra job for this is probably the
safest option but tripleo CI resources are a constraint, for that reason
I would add it to the HA job (which is currently non voting) and once
its stable we should make it voting.

> I'd be supportive of making it the default HA job in the longer term as
> long as the LVM code is still getting tested somewhere - LVM is still
> the reference implementation in cinder and after discussion there was
> strong resistance to changing that.
We are and would continue to use lvm for our non ha jobs, If I
understand it correctly the tripleo lvm support isn't HA so continuing
to test it on our HA job doesn't achieve much.

> I've no strong opinions on the node layout, I'll leave that to more
> knowledgable people to discuss.
> Is the ceph/tripleO code in a working state yet? Is there a guide to
> using it?
> On 26 November 2014 at 13:10, Giulio Fidente <gfidente at redhat.com
> <mailto:gfidente at redhat.com>> wrote:
>     hi there,
>     while working on the TripleO cinder-ha spec meant to provide HA for
>     Cinder via Ceph [1], we wondered how to (if at all) test this in CI,
>     so we're looking for some feedback
>     first of all, shall we make Cinder/Ceph the default for our
>     (currently non-voting) HA job?
>     (check-tripleo-ironic-__overcloud-precise-ha)
>     current implementation (under review) should permit for the
>     deployment of both the Ceph monitors and Ceph OSDs on either
>     controllers, dedicated nodes, or to split them up so that only OSDs
>     are on dedicated nodes
>     what would be the best scenario for CI?
>     * a single additional node hosting a Ceph OSD with the Ceph monitors
>     deployed on all controllers (my preference is for this one)

I would be happy with this so long as it didn't drastically increase the
time to run the HA job.

>     * a single additional node hosting a Ceph OSD and a Ceph monitor
>     * no additional nodes with controllers also service as Ceph monitor
>     and Ceph OSD
>     more scenarios? comments? Thanks for helping
>     1.
>     https://blueprints.launchpad.__net/tripleo/+spec/tripleo-__kilo-cinder-ha
>     <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/tripleo-kilo-cinder-ha>
>     -- 
>     Giulio Fidente
>     GPG KEY: 08D733BA
>     _________________________________________________
>     OpenStack-dev mailing list
>     OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.__org
>     <mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>     http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
> -- 
> Duncan Thomas
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list