Open Stack

On 07/09/2015 02:16 AM, Kris G. Lindgren wrote:
> Does OSP support running each service in an LXC container as well? 
>  What about nova-cells? How does it handle people who need to carry 
> local changes?  What is the upgrade path like with OSP?

So, ignoring the Hypervisor for the moment, there is no reason that the 
rest of the controllers can't run in separate Containers.  I think a 
container based deployment would be fantastic.

venv is not really sufficient, as the system level binaries can still 
conflict (MysQL and LDAP both require system libraries for Keystone, for 
example)

 From an Ansible perspective;  we need to  be able to share the HTTPD 
instance for Keystone and Apache, and getting that right will solve most 
of the issues deploying in a secure manner.  Putting Them on separate 
hosts or containers should be a degenerate case, and thus be supported, too.






>
> Asking, because in Philly the general consensus, I fel,t was people 
> want to move away from the current system level package stuff and move 
> towards: venv's, "lightweight packages", containers.  The only reason 
> that was brought up to keep packages around was to solve the 
> non-python lib stuff and using a depsolver (yum/apt) that doesn't suck 
> (pip).  So I am pretty sure my wants are inline with what other people 
> in the community are either already doing or moving towards.
> ___________________________________________
> Kris Lindgren
> Senior Linux Systems Engineer
> GoDaddy, LLC.
>
>
> From: John Dewey <john at dewey.ws <mailto:john at dewey.ws>>
> Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 11:43 PM
> To: "Kris G. Lindgren" <klindgren at godaddy.com 
> <mailto:klindgren at godaddy.com>>
> Cc: Adam Young <ayoung at redhat.com <mailto:ayoung at redhat.com>>, 
> "openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org 
> <mailto:openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org>" 
> <openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org 
> <mailto:openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OSAD for RHEL
>
> This would not be acceptable for those running OSP.
>
> On Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Kris G. Lindgren wrote:
>
>> I should be more clear. My current thought is to have a venv packaged
>> inside an rpm - so the rpm includes the needed init scripts, ensures the
>> required system level binaries are installed, adds the users - ect ect.
>> But would be a single deployable autonomous unit. Also, have a versioning
>> schema to roll forward and back between venvs for quick update/rollback.
>> We are already working on doing something similar to this to run kilo on
>> cent6 boxen, until we can finish revving the remaining parts of the fleet
>> to cent7.
>>
>> My desire is to move away from using system level python & openstack
>> packages, so that I can possibly run mismatched versions if I need to. We
>> had a need to run kilo ceilometer and juno neutron/nova on a single
>> server. The conflicting python requirements between those made that task
>> impossible. In general I want to get away from treating Openstack as a
>> single system that everything needs to be upgraded in lock step (packages
>> force you into this). I want to move to being able to upgrade say
>> oslo.messaging to a newer version on just say nova on my control plane
>> servers. Or upgrade nova to kilo while keeping the rest of the system
>> (neutron) on juno. Unless I run each service in a vm/container or on a
>> physical piece of hardware that is pretty much impossible to do with
>> packages - outside of placing everything inside venv's.
>>
>> However, it is my understanding that OSAD already builds its own
>> python-wheels and runs those inside lxc containers. So I don¹t really
>> follow what good throwing those into an rpm would really do?
>> ____________________________________________
>> Kris Lindgren
>> Senior Linux Systems Engineer
>> GoDaddy, LLC.
>>
>>
>> On 7/8/15, 10:33 PM, "Adam Young" <ayoung at redhat.com 
>> <mailto:ayoung at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/07/2015 05:55 PM, Kris G. Lindgren wrote:
>>>> +1 on RHEL support. I have some interest in moving away from packages
>>>> and
>>>> am interested in the OSAD tooling as well.
>>>
>>> I would not recommend an approach targetting RHEL that does not use
>>> packages.
>>>
>>> OSAD support for RHEL using packages would be an outstanding tool.
>>>
>>> Which way are you planning on taking it?
>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________
>>>> Kris Lindgren
>>>> Senior Linux Systems Engineer
>>>> GoDaddy, LLC.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7/7/15, 3:38 PM, "Abel Lopez" <alopgeek at gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:alopgeek at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey everyone,
>>>>> I've started looking at osad, and I like much of the direction it
>>>>> takes.
>>>>> I'm pretty interested in developing it to run on RHEL, I just 
>>>>> wanted to
>>>>> check if anyone would be -2 opposed to that before I spend cycles on
>>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>>>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org 
>>>> <mailto:OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org 
>>> <mailto:OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org 
>> <mailto:OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org>
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20150709/06bfb834/attachment.html>