fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Dmitry Borodaenko <dborodaenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

1 - this is not a typo, this bug prevents the rest of the fix from
finishing deployment, so a fix had to be included for the whole patch to
remain testable. The primary bug makes Ceilometer deployment unreliable, so
the're is not much point in separating the fixes.

2 - I had an iso build kicked off in MNV yesterday, I can share it when I
get to the office. In addition to this patch, patched haproxy packages are
required to build an ISO, there's OSCI build link in Jira.

-DmitryB
On Feb 10, 2014 10:06 PM, "Matthew Mosesohn" <mmosesohn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Dmitry, two questions:
> 1 - How does this patch relate to
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1278603 ? Is it a typo? It's
> related to logging, not haproxy.
> 2 - Is there an ISO already available for testing?
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko
> <dborodaenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > For the past few weeks, I've been working on a big refactoring of
> > HAProxy related manifests in Fuel Library, and now I am finally
> > satisfied with how these manifests work in Ubuntu and CentOS.
> >
> > It started as a fix for LP bug #1264388 and has brought up a long
> > chain of problems that had to be resolved before the original problem
> > could be addressed. The result is a massive 1318 line review request
> > that completely rewrites the haproxy module (based on latest upstream
> > version), refactors the haproxy parts of cluster and openstack
> > modules, and touches osnailyfacter, galera, neutron, and ceilometer
> > modules:
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/65591
> >
> > The primary purpose of this change is to make sure that HAProxy
> > listening services can be enabled one at a time, after the
> > corresponding backend service is configured and started (and releases
> > the VIP if that's their default configuration), and before other
> > services that require that service to be available via a VIP. The
> > benefits are a more reliable and predictable HA deployment process,
> > reduced coupling between our Puppet modules, and ability to put more
> > services behind HAProxy without any impact on the core services.
> >
> > Please review this change and help me test it. See comments on the
> > review for a list of configurations where this was tested, if this
> > works for you in another configuration, please +1 and specify the
> > configuration you used.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Dmitry Borodaenko
> >
> > --
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> > Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp