Open Stack

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Alfredo Moralejo Alonso
<amoralej at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Emilien Macchi <emilien at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Queens's main theme is stabilization.
>> That's what we're currently working on in our CI, see which areas we
>> can consolidate and stabilize so we can continue to scale TripleO
>> development.
>>
>> One of the challenges that we had in the last years was the high
>> demand of OVB jobs versus the capacity.
>> To address that, we recently decided to remove ovb-nonha. It was a good
>> start.
>>
>> Now we have:
>> - ovb-ha which test introspection, Pacemaker, TLS, net-iso (multi-nics)
>> - ovb-containers which tested a containerized overcloud
>> - ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024: which was renamed from
>> ovb-updates and is supposed to test ipv6 overcloud, stack updates &
>> ceph. It doesn't test stack updates (since the switch to
>> tripleo-quickstart), and Ceph is already extensively tested in
>> multinode scenario001/004 jobs.
>>
>> That said, I think we can consolidate the OVB jobs in 2:
>>
>> - keep ovb-ha and containerize it in Queens and beyond: it was already
>> approved and change is being applied now:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522293/
>>   indeed, we decided as a community that we would stop supporting
>> non-containerized overclouds in Queens and beyond.
>
>
> We still have some multinode jobs running non-containerized deployment in
> periodic pipeline (failing after https://review.openstack.org/#/c/518423/).
> Should we remove these jobs?

Yes and sorry if we missed it.

>>
>> - remove ovb-containers in Queens and beyond: useless now, since we
>> have ovb-ha containerized: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522579/
>> - Remove ovb-1ctlr_1comp_1ceph-featureset024 and create ovb-ha-ipv6:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522618/
>>   indeed, ceph is already well tested in scenarios, ipv6 would be
>> tested in ovb-ha-ipv6.
>>   for overcloud updates, I haven't seen the feature in quickstart but
>> I might have missed something (any help here is welcome).
>>
>> At the end, we should end up with 2 OVB jobs:
>> - ovb-ha (could be renamed in ovb-ha-ipv4 if that helps)
>> - ovb-ha-ipv6
>>
>> Both would test the things that can't be tested by multinode:
>> - Nova / Ironic / Mistral workflow
>> - Introspection
>> - TLS
>> - Network Isolation
>> - IPv6 for the ovb-ha-ipv6
>> - Containerized overcloud
>>
>> As a result, we have more coverage (except for stack updates but it
>> needs to be addressed in quickstart first) and less jobs, so less
>> resources consumed.
>>
>> Any feedback on this plan is more than welcome,
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>



-- 
Emilien Macchi