Open Stack

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 3:08 PM, James Slagle <james.slagle at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Emilien Macchi <emilien at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 2:03 PM, James Slagle <james.slagle at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I've been working on various patches to TripleO to make it possible
>>> for the baremetal provisioning part of the workflow to be optional. In
>>> such a scenario, TripleO wouldn't use Nova or Ironic to boot any
>>> baremetal nodes. Instead it would rely on the nodes to be already
>>> installed with an OS and powered on. We then use Heat to drive the
>>> deployment of OpenStack on those nodes...that part of the process is
>>> largely unchanged.
>>>
>>> One of the things this would allow TripleO to do is make use of CI
>>> jobs using nodes just from the regular cloud providers in nodepool
>>> instead of having to use our own TripleO cloud
>>> (tripleo-test-cloud-rh1) to run all our jobs.
>>>
>>> I'm at a point where I can start working on patches to try and set
>>> this up, but I wanted to provide this context so folks were aware of
>>> the background.
>>>
>>> We'd probably start with our simplest configuration of a job with at
>>> least 3 nodes (undercloud/controller/compute), and using CentOS
>>> images. It looks like right now all multinode jobs are 2 nodes only
>>> and use Ubuntu. My hope is that I/we can make some progress in
>>> different multinode configurations and collaborate on any setup
>>> scripts or ansible playbooks in a generally useful way. I know there
>>> was interest in different multinode setups from the various deployment
>>> teams at the cross project session in Austin.
>>>
>>> If there are any pitfalls or if there are any concerns about TripleO
>>> going in this direction, I thought we could discuss those here. Thanks
>>> for any feedback.
>>
>> It is more a question than a concern:
>> are we still going to test baremetal introspection with Ironic
>> somewhere in OpenStack?
>>
>> I like the way it goes but I'm wondering if the things that we're not
>> going to test anymore will still be tested somewhere else (maybe in
>> Ironic / Nova CI jobs) or maybe it's already the case and then stop me
>> here.
>>
>
> I should have clarified: we're not moving away from still having our
> own cloud running the TripleO jobs we have today.

Thanks for this clarification!

> This is about adding new jobs to test a different way of deploying via
> TripleO Since we'd be able to use nodepool nodes directly to do that,
> I'm proposing to do it that way.
>
> If it pans out, I'd expect us to have a variety of jobs running with
> different permutations so that we can have as much coverage as
> possible.

I like it, I see different use-cases where we don't need to test
baremetal provisioning. One of them is openstack/puppet-* testing
(except for puppet-nova and puppet-ironic maybe) where we just want to
run puppet on a undercloud / overcloud and see if services are
working. With the new jobs, I would propose to think at removing old
jobs and use new multi-node jobs, it will help us to save time,
resources and test what we actually need to test.
-- 
Emilien Macchi