fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Meg McRoberts <mmcroberts@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Actually, I have a doc fix from Dmitry Pyzhov that suggests using  lrzuntar
xxx.tar.lrz

rather than tar -xf xxx.tar


On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk <sgolovatiuk@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:

> By default, user doesn't need to perform any actions. upgrade.sh will
> understand lrzip as well as tar or tar.gz or tar.bz. However, if the user
> wants to save time before potential downtime or service disruption he may
> unpack archive.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Sergii Golovatiuk,
> Skype #golserge
> IRC #holser
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:31 PM, David Easter <deaster@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sergii,
>>
>>   Wouldn’t that step already have been done?  i.e. I already tar xvf the
>> tarball prior to upgrading.  Otherwise I wouldn’t be able to run
>> ./upgrade.sh.   I thought this workaround was to run the actual upgrade
>> process twice…
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>  - David J. Easter
>>    Director of Product Management,   Mirantis, Inc.
>>
>> From: Sergii Golovatiuk <sgolovatiuk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Friday, August 22, 2014 at 1:21 PM
>> To: Matthew Mosesohn <mmosesohn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: David Easter <deaster@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <
>> fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Evgeniy L <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [Fuel-dev] Do we really want to update docker during the
>> upgrade before HCF?
>>
>> David, user may unpack and prepare tarball before starting the upgrade
>> process to save time.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Sergii Golovatiuk,
>> Skype #golserge
>> IRC #holser
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Matthew Mosesohn <
>> mmosesohn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> David, it will roughly double the time yes.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:56 PM, David Easter <deaster@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Also, what is the effect on the user experience?  If the process is run
>>> > twice - even automatically - is this going to double the upgrade time
>>> from
>>> > 20 minutes to 40 minutes?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > - David J. Easter
>>> >   Director of Product Management,   Mirantis, Inc.
>>> >
>>> > From: Meg McRoberts <mmcroberts@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > Date: Friday, August 22, 2014 at 10:38 AM
>>> > To: Evgeniy L <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > Cc: "fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > Subject: Re: [Fuel-dev] Do we really want to update docker during the
>>> > upgrade before HCF?
>>> >
>>> > Just to clarify, are the upgrade instructions for 5.1 to run upgrade.sh
>>> > twice
>>> > or are you making ./upgrade.sh run itself twice for one user command?
>>> >
>>> > I just created https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1360372 to cover
>>> the
>>> > 5.1 upgrade instructions.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Evgeniy L <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Created a ticket [1] for osci team to remove new package
>>> >> from the repo, in this case puppet won't update and restart
>>> >> docker.
>>> >>
>>> >> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1360274
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Mike Scherbakov
>>> >> <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Jus run upgrade again is absolutely fine for 5.1. If these are only
>>> >>> things required as workaround, let's revert docker upgrade.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Mike Scherbakov
>>> >>> #mihgen
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Aug 22, 2014 5:15 PM, "Evgeniy L" <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> As far as I can see the only workaround how user can
>>> >>>> handle it is to run upgrade again.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> The problem with dockerctl which cleans up some
>>> >>>> mount points is for 5.0.1 upgrade we didn't use dockerctl
>>> >>>> to start containers, we somehow have to fix it in upgrade
>>> >>>> script.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Also I have some problems which related only to 5.0.1
>>> >>>> iso, I'm debugging it now, it looks like 60 seconds is
>>> >>>> not enough for postgres container to bring the service
>>> >>>> up.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Matthew Mosesohn
>>> >>>> <mmosesohn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Evgeniy,
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Do you have a workaround for the duplicate IP address allocation
>>> bug?
>>> >>>>> We're upgrading to fix one bug and so far it seems stable to me. I
>>> >>>>> have a lot of workarounds in dockerctl to start these up, but it's
>>> >>>>> less than ideal.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Evgeniy L <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>> > Hi,
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> > Several days ago we got patched docker where was fixed a problem
>>> [1]
>>> >>>>> > with IPs duplication during containers run. But upgrading of
>>> docker
>>> >>>>> > seemed to be risky and it's appeared to be risky, we got several
>>> bugs
>>> >>>>> > [2],
>>> >>>>> > [3].
>>> >>>>> > The problem is when we upgrade docker, it stops all of the
>>> >>>>> > containers,
>>> >>>>> > and it starts them again after update, and restart of docker is
>>> buggy
>>> >>>>> > and
>>> >>>>> > has side effects [4].
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> > I'm not sure if it's a full list of problems which we can have
>>> with
>>> >>>>> > docker
>>> >>>>> > update.
>>> >>>>> > I would like to suggest not to update docker in the current
>>> release
>>> >>>>> > and
>>> >>>>> > try to make another workaround for the issue with ip duplication.
>>> >>>>> > I'll try to handle docker update on upgrade system side, but I'm
>>> not
>>> >>>>> > sure
>>> >>>>> > if will have enough time to test it properly.
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> > Thanks
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> > [1] https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/5783
>>> >>>>> > [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1360146
>>> >>>>> > [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1360161
>>> >>>>> > [4] https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/6675
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> > --
>>> >>>>> > 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
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> --
>>> >>>>> 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
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> 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
>>> >>>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> 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
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > -- 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
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > 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
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> 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
>
>