Open Stack

Adrian,

When the docker daemon starts, it needs to know the bip and mtu which are
generated by flannel. So flannel and etcd should start before docker
daemon, but if flannel and etcd run in the same daemon, it introduces a
circle. We need another docker daemon which is dedicated to flannel and
etcd.

Regards
wanghua

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com>
wrote:

> Adrian,
>
> Its a real shame Atomic can't execute its mission -  serve as a container
> operating system.  If you need some guidance on image building find
> experienced developers on #kolla – we have extensive experience in
> producing containers for various runtime environments focused around
> OpenStack.
>
> Regards
> -steve
>
>
> From: Adrian Otto <adrian.otto at rackspace.com>
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Date: Monday, December 7, 2015 at 1:16 PM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum]storage for docker-bootstrap
>
> Until I see evidence to the contrary, I think adding some bootstrap
> complexity to simplify the process of bay node image management and
> customization is worth it. Think about where most users will focus
> customization efforts. My guess is that it will be within these docker
> images. We should ask our team to keep things as simple as possible while
> working to containerize components where that makes sense. That may take
> some creativity and a few iterations to achieve.
>
> We can pivot on this later if we try it and hate it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adrian
>
> On Dec 7, 2015, at 1:57 AM, Kai Qiang Wu <wkqwu at cn.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> HI Hua,
>
> From my point of view, not everything needed to be put in container. Let's
> make the initial start (be simple)to work and then discussed other options
> if needed in IRC or weekly meeting.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Best Wishes,
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kai Qiang Wu (吴开强 Kennan）
> IBM China System and Technology Lab, Beijing
>
> E-mail: wkqwu at cn.ibm.com
> Tel: 86-10-82451647
> Address: Building 28(Ring Building), ZhongGuanCun Software Park,
> No.8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, Haidian District Beijing P.R.China 100193
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Follow your heart. You are miracle!
>
> <graycol.gif>王华 ---07/12/2015 10:10:38 am---Hi all, If we want to run
> etcd and flannel in container, we will introduce
>
> From: 王华 <wanghua.humble at gmail.com>
> To: Egor Guz <EGuz at walmartlabs.com>
> Cc: "openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >
> Date: 07/12/2015 10:10 am
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum]storage for docker-bootstrap
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> If we want to run etcd and flannel in container, we will
> introduce docker-bootstrap which makes setup become more complex as Egor
> pointed out. Should we pay for the price?
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Egor Guz <*EGuz at walmartlabs.com*
> <EGuz at walmartlabs.com>> wrote:
>
>    Wanghua,
>
>    I don’t think moving flannel to the container is good idea. This is
>    setup great for dev environment, but become too complex from operator point
>    of view (you add extra Docker daemon and need extra Cinder volume for this
>    daemon, also
>    keep in mind it makes sense to keep etcd data folder at Cinder storage
>    as well because etcd is database). flannel has just there files without
>    extra dependencies and it’s much easy to download it during cloud-init ;)
>
>    I agree that we have pain with building Fedora Atomic images, but
>    instead of simplify this process we should switch to another more
>    “friendly” images (e.g. Fedora/CentOS/Ubuntu) which we can easy build with
>    disk builder.
>    Also we can fix CoreOS template (I believe people more asked about it
>    instead of Atomic), but we may face similar to Atomic issues when we will
>    try to integrate not CoreOS products (e.g. Calico or Weave)
>
>    —
>    Egor
>
>    From: 王华 <*wanghua.humble at gmail.com* <wanghua.humble at gmail.com><mailto:
>    *wanghua.humble at gmail.com* <wanghua.humble at gmail.com>>>
>    Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>    questions)" <*openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org*
>    <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org><mailto:
>    *openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org* <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>    >>
>    Date: Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 00:15
>    To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
>    *openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org* <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>    <mailto:*openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org*
>    <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>>
>    Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum]storage for docker-bootstrap
>
>    Hi Hongbin,
>
>    The docker in master node stores data in
>    /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--data and metadata in
>    /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--meta. /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--data and
>    /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--meta are logic volumes. The docker in minion
>    node store data in the cinder volume, but /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--meta
>    and /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--meta are not used. If we want to leverage
>    Cinder volume for docker in master, should we drop
>    /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--meta and /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--meta? I
>    think it is not necessary to allocate a Cinder volume. It is enough to
>    allocate two logic volumes for docker, because only etcd, flannel, k8s run
>    in the docker daemon which need not a large amount of storage.
>
>    Best regards,
>    Wanghua
>
>    On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Hongbin Lu <*hongbin.lu at huawei.com*
>    <hongbin.lu at huawei.com><mailto:*hongbin.lu at huawei.com*
>    <hongbin.lu at huawei.com>>> wrote:
>    Here is a bit more context.
>
>    Currently, at k8s and swarm bay, some required binaries (i.e. etcd and
>    flannel) are built into image and run at host. We are exploring the
>    possibility to containerize some of these system components. The rationales
>    are (i) it is infeasible to build custom packages into an atomic image and
>    (ii) it is infeasible to upgrade individual component. For example, if
>    there is a bug in current version of flannel and we know the bug was fixed
>    in the next version, we need to upgrade flannel by building a new image,
>    which is a tedious process.
>
>    To containerize flannel, we need a second docker daemon, called
>    docker-bootstrap [1]. In this setup, pods are running on the main docker
>    daemon, and flannel and etcd are running on the second docker daemon. The
>    reason is that flannel needs to manage the network of the main docker
>    daemon, so it needs to run on a separated daemon.
>
>    Daneyon, I think it requires separated storage because it needs to run
>    a separated docker daemon (unless there is a way to make two docker daemons
>    share the same storage).
>
>    Wanghua, is it possible to leverage Cinder volume for that. Leveraging
>    external storage is always preferred [2].
>
>    [1]
>    *http://kubernetes.io/v1.1/docs/getting-started-guides/docker-multinode.html#bootstrap-docker*
>    <http://kubernetes.io/v1.1/docs/getting-started-guides/docker-multinode.html#bootstrap-docker>
>    [2] *http://www.projectatomic.io/docs/docker-storage-recommendation/*
>    <http://www.projectatomic.io/docs/docker-storage-recommendation/>
>
>    Best regards,
>    Hongbin
>
>    From: Daneyon Hansen (danehans) [mailto:*danehans at cisco.com*
>    <danehans at cisco.com><mailto:*danehans at cisco.com* <danehans at cisco.com>>]
>    Sent: November-25-15 11:10 AM
>    To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>    Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum]storage for docker-bootstrap
>
>
>
>    From: 王华 <*wanghua.humble at gmail.com* <wanghua.humble at gmail.com><mailto:
>    *wanghua.humble at gmail.com* <wanghua.humble at gmail.com>>>
>    Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>    questions)" <*openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org*
>    <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org><mailto:
>    *openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org* <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>    >>
>    Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 5:00 AM
>    To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
>    *openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org* <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>    <mailto:*openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org*
>    <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>>
>    Subject: [openstack-dev] [magnum]storage for docker-bootstrap
>
>    Hi all,
>
>    I am working on containerizing etcd and flannel. But I met a problem.
>    As described in [1], we need a docker-bootstrap. Docker and
>    docker-bootstrap can not use the same storage, so we need some disk space
>    for it.
>
>    I reviewed [1] and I do not see where the bootstrap docker instance
>    requires separate storage.
>
>    The docker in master node stores data in
>    /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--data and metadata in
>    /dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--meta. The disk space left is too same for
>    docker-bootstrap. Even if the root_gb of the instance flavor is 20G, only
>    8G can be used in our image. I want to make it bigger. One way is we can
>    add the disk space left in the vda as vda3 into atomicos vg after the
>    instance starts and we allocate two logic volumes for docker-bootstrap.
>    Another way is when we create the image, we allocate two logic volumes for
>    docker-bootstrap. The second way has a advantage. It doesn't have to make
>    filesystem when the instance is created which is time consuming.
>
>    What is your opinion?
>
>    Best Regards
>    Wanghua
>
>    [1]
>    *http://kubernetes.io/v1.1/docs/getting-started-guides/docker-multinode/master.html*
>    <http://kubernetes.io/v1.1/docs/getting-started-guides/docker-multinode/master.html>
>
>
>    __________________________________________________________________________
>    OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>    Unsubscribe:
>    *OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe*
>    <http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe><
>    *http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe*
>    <http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>>
> *http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev*
>    <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20151217/2b25d279/attachment.html>