Open Stack

On 07/10/2015 02:25 PM, Kevin Carter wrote:
>
> To be clear the present OSAD project really has no intention to bring 
> package based installations of OpenStack. We'd certainly not reject 
> the idea and wouldn't mind having an implementation spec for it 
> but all of our current tooling and design principles have been based 
> on the fact that we've move away from distro packages and on to 
> upstream source as it pertains to OpenStack. The system as it stands 
> today creates an internal repository of built wheels for your 
> environment and all of the OpenStack services are installed within LXC 
> containers, where possible and it makes sense. The installation of 
> these bits comes from the internal wheel repository and uses pip and 
> all of the pre / post config happens within the Ansible playbooks.
>

I understand your frustration with the packaging approach.  For a first 
approximation, getting the code for OpenStack/Python operations out of 
Pip makes sense.  Ideally, we would be able to support both approaches.  
Red Hat would not support a pip based install, but I am sure some Centos 
base users would be happy with pip.

We had the same general discussion around devstack.

>
> One issue that will become a problem, for users of RedHat 
> specifically, is the fact that RedHat has no LXC container templates 
> (at least none that are publicly available) and even if someone were 
> to make an official RedHat container template there'd be issues with 
> the containers being able to connect to the satellite servers as well 
> as other potential license problems.
>

I'd leave the issues with getting blessed RHEL LXC support to Red Hat.  
Making something that works for CentOS with publically available LXC 
containers there would be more what I expect from OSAD upstream.

What about Fedora support?  It seems to me that we would be far more 
likely to have something supportable with Fedora that could then be 
backported to CentOS?

>
> I've done some experimenting with a RedHat 7.1 hosts and CentOS 7 
> containers and things seem to work OK but I'd not say that I have 
> really put a lot of effort into it. That said, if its something that 
> you'd all like to work on I'd be happy to help out to make it all go.
>

Sounds good.  I'll give it a try after the Keystone Midcycle.

>
> --
>
> Kevin Carter
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Adam Young <ayoung at redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 9, 2015 11:32 AM
> *To:* Kris G. Lindgren; John Dewey
> *Cc:* openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack-operators] OSAD for RHEL
> 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/20150714/1d20fa1f/attachment.html>