Open Stack

On 2018-01-10 19:34:07 +0100 (+0100), Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 10.01.2018 o 18:28, Jeremy Stanley pisze:
> > On 2018-01-10 09:06:43 -0800 (-0800), Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
> >> So it's my understanding (which is limited at best) that zuul
> >> currently doesn't support something like "this job has to run on
> >> nodepool X", which would be necessary. We might need to add some sort
> >> of metadata for nodepools and be able to specify in zuul job that
> >> "this job has to land on node with metadata X", like architecture:
> >> arm64.
> 
> > This shouldn't be an issue since our node types are tightly coupled
> > to the images they boot, and the arm64 architecture images will I'm
> > sure get distinct names (as an offshoot of this though, we may end
> > up extending the names of our current amd64 images to embed
> > processor architecture names for consistency, but this is one of the
> > many points we'll need to debate).
> 
> Docker images can be multiarch so same names are used on different
> architectures.

Right, these are virtual machine images and not Docker images, but
regardless we _could_ do something similar. This would however
require some reworking of Nodepool and Zuul to become processor
architecture aware so that it could be tracked independently of node
type and image build.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/attachments/20180110/eb88bab7/attachment.sig>