Open Stack

I'm all for it!
Another benefit is better coverage for the standalone CI job(s), when it 
will (hopefully) become a mandatory dependency for overcloud multinode 
jobs.

On 7/16/18 12:49 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Juan Antonio Osorio
> <jaosorior at gmail.com> wrote:
>>   Sounds good to me. Even if pacemaker is heavier, less options and
>> consistency is better.
>>
>> Greetings from Mexico :D
> 
> Greetings from Poznań :D
> 
>>
>> On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, 13:33 Emilien Macchi, <emilien at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> We have been supporting both Keepalived and Pacemaker to handle VIP
>>> management.
> 
> This is really good initiative which supports the main idea of 'simplicity'.
> 
>>> Keepalived is actually the tool used by the undercloud when SSL is enabled
>>> (for SSL termination).
>>> While Pacemaker is used on the overcloud to handle VIPs but also services
>>> HA.
>>>
>>> I see some benefits at removing support for keepalived and deploying
>>> Pacemaker by default:
>>> - pacemaker can be deployed on one node (we actually do it in CI), so can
>>> be deployed on the undercloud to handle VIPs and manage HA as well.
> 
> Additionally, undercloud services may be done HA on 3 nodes if/when
> it's really required.
> 
>>> - it'll allow to extend undercloud & standalone use cases to support
>>> multinode one day, with HA and SSL, like we already have on the overcloud.
>>> - it removes the complexity of managing two tools so we'll potentially
>>> removing code in TripleO.
> 
> ++
> 
>>> - of course since pacemaker features from overcloud would be usable in
>>> standalone environment, but also on the undercloud.
> 
> The same OCF scripts will be used for undercloud and overcloud.
> 
>>>
>>> There is probably some downside, the first one is I think Keepalived is
>>> much more lightweight than Pacemaker, we probably need to run some benchmark
>>> here and make sure we don't make the undercloud heavier than it is now.
> 
>  From other perspective operator need to learn/support 2 tools.
> 
>>>
>>> I went ahead and created this blueprint for Stein:
>>>
>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/undercloud-pacemaker-default
>>> I also plan to prototype some basic code soon and provide an upgrade path
>>> if we accept this blueprint.
> 
> I would like to participate in this initiative as I found it very valuable.
> 
>>>
>>> This is something I would like to discuss here and at the PTG, feel free
>>> to bring questions/concerns,
>>> Thanks!
>>> --
>>> 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
>>
> 


-- 
Best regards,
Bogdan Dobrelya,
Irc #bogdando