fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Dmitry Borodaenko <dborodaenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't think we should allow patching process to be interrupted,
precisely because of the reasons you highlighted: additional
complexity and risk of data loss. So my vote is 1) definitely not in
this release; 2) probably not in any near-future releases.

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Evgeniy L <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We were working on implementation of experimental feature
> where user could interrupt openstack patching procedure [1].
>
> It's not as easy to implement as we thought it would be.
> Current stop deployment mechanism [2] stops puppet, erases
> nodes and reboots them into bootstrap. It's ok for stop
> deployment, but it's not ok for patching, because user
> can loose his data. We can rewrite some logic in nailgun
> and in orchestrator to stop puppet and not to erase nodes.
> But I'm not sure if it works correctly because such use
> case wasn't tested. And I can see the problems like
> yum/apt-get locks cleaning after puppet interruption.
>
> As result I have several questions:
> 1. should we try to make it work for the current release?
> 2. if we shouldn't, will we need this feature for the future
>     releases? Definitely additional design and research is
>     required.
>
> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1364907
> [2]
> https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-astute/blob/b622d9b36dbdd1e03b282b9ee5b7435ba649e711/lib/astute/server/dispatcher.rb#L163-L164
>
>
> --
> 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