fuel-dev team mailing list archive
-
fuel-dev team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #01506
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
Evgeniy,
This is great. The patch set looks excellent and thanks for stress testing
Docker. Very well done!
Thanks,
Roman
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Dmitry Borodaenko <dborodaenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
> Impressive work Evgeniy! And special kudos for the detailed commit
> message, an example to be followed!
>
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Evgeniy L <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to provide status for master node upgrade feature.
> > We merged a patch [1] which increased stability of upgrade.
> >
> > It fixes a lot of problems here is the list of some of them:
> > * fixed known and unknown raise conditions, e.g. keystone
> > db migration interruption
> > * now we won't have problem with ip duplication, I haven't
> > seen the problem, so I cannot say how often it happened,
> > but can say that the patch solves the problem in case of upgrade
> > * the patch twice reduces probability of docker's death during
> > the upgrade
> >
> > In the last 24 hours I tested the patch on 4 virtual machines,
> > there were 915 upgrade runs (to reduce the time of upgrade
> > I enabled only docker engine, which is the most problematic
> > part of master node upgrade), at the end of the day there
> > were 0 failed upgrades.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/118387/
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Matthew Mosesohn <
> mmosesohn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Regarding paste.openstack.org, we should look to another pastebin
> >> provider. It has been giving 500 errors quite nearly consistently for
> >> me lately and really interferes with my work. We could use pastie.org,
> >> for example.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Mike Scherbakov
> >> <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > OpenStack uses paste.openstack.org all the time, and I've heard
> issues
> >> > with
> >> > how long content is stored there.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Aleksandra Fedorova
> >> > <afedorova@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I can not find the policy about how long data is stored there, but I
> >> >> doubt
> >> >> that pastebin service can be used as a longterm storage. If we don't
> >> >> want to
> >> >> lose logs and scripts data, the use of paste.o.o links for bug
> reports
> >> >> should be forbidden.
> >> >>
> >> >> Launchpad attachments are much more reliable even though less
> >> >> comfortable
> >> >> to use.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Aug 27, 2014 8:49 AM, "Mike Scherbakov" <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> +1 on updating bug descriptions (not comments) about probability of
> >> >>> failure, and using paste.openstack.org more often.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko
> >> >>> <dborodaenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:11 AM, Mike Scherbakov
> >> >>>> <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >>>> > "confusing versioning in OpenStack patching" - if we didn't
> change
> >> >>>> > puppet
> >> >>>> > manifests and Fuel/OpenStack reference architecture in next Fuel
> >> >>>> > versions,
> >> >>>> > then it would be as simple as patching from 5.0 to 5.1. But it
> >> >>>> > appeared to
> >> >>>> > be more complicated system than you would initially think of, so
> in
> >> >>>> > general
> >> >>>> > 5.0.2 may not be equal to 5.1, that's where all things come up.
> If
> >> >>>> > we
> >> >>>> > had
> >> >>>> > OpenStack upgrades, then we could just say 5.0 -> 6.0 - easy.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> We may have had technical reasons to make this decision, but it
> still
> >> >>>> is confusing and negatively impacts UX. I agree that having an
> >> >>>> incomplete feature early is better than not having it at all until
> >> >>>> much later, as long as we don't stop working on it until it's
> >> >>>> complete
> >> >>>> and these small but annoying deficiencies are addressed. Our
> >> >>>> experience with technical debt so far is not very reassuring.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> > "issues with containers" - we have same issues with everything.
> >> >>>> > Let's
> >> >>>> > take
> >> >>>> > Galera, for example. It's just issues. We can question maturity
> of
> >> >>>> > tools we
> >> >>>> > use, and here I'd agree - we spent too much fixing issues around
> >> >>>> > Docker. At
> >> >>>> > the same time, if we were about taking our own journey with LXC,
> we
> >> >>>> > would
> >> >>>> > likely spend even more time inventing our own bicycle.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> You're assuming that it was just Docker as a piece of software that
> >> >>>> is
> >> >>>> the primary cause of all our troubles with Fuel upgrades. Docker is
> >> >>>> only a small part of the a much large and much more intrusive
> design
> >> >>>> decision to use containers for upgrading Fuel (and also the design
> >> >>>> decision to use a different mechanism based on Puppet for patching
> >> >>>> OpenStack). I think we should question high-level design decisions
> >> >>>> like these more often, even after they are implemented.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> > Also, I'd like to ask everyone to provide
> >> >>>> > such information in every bug you report if possible (or if get
> >> >>>> > this
> >> >>>> > info
> >> >>>> > later, put comments): in many bug reports it is unclear to
> >> >>>> > understand
> >> >>>> > how
> >> >>>> > severe issue is.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I think we should start updating bug description more often, so
> that
> >> >>>> you can find a summary of current state of the bug and of all
> >> >>>> relevant
> >> >>>> information from the description, without having to scroll through
> >> >>>> dozens of comments. We should also use paste.openstack.org more
> >> >>>> heavily and avoid pasting more than 1-2 lines of logs into bug
> >> >>>> description and comments, also to make it easier to find important
> >> >>>> bits in bugs history.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Mike Scherbakov
> >> >>> #mihgen
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> 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
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Mike Scherbakov
> >> > #mihgen
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
Follow ups
References
-
Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Evgeniy L, 2014-08-25
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Roman Alekseenkov, 2014-08-26
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Mike Scherbakov, 2014-08-26
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Dmitry Borodaenko, 2014-08-26
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Mike Scherbakov, 2014-08-27
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Aleksandra Fedorova, 2014-08-27
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Mike Scherbakov, 2014-08-27
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Matthew Mosesohn, 2014-08-27
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Evgeniy L, 2014-09-03
-
Re: Fuel master node upgrade - bugs statuses
From: Dmitry Borodaenko, 2014-09-03