Mailing List Archive

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 8:46 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:

> OpenStackers,
> I have several questions for using kolla deployment in production:
>
1. Binary or source? Which one is mostly used in production
>

I've heard a lot more reports from people running source, but this is
anecdotal

2. Which one is easy to operation, like updating..
>

IMHO source is better for updates. With binary you sit around waiting for
packages to decide a patch or stable milestone is worthy of dropping new
packages. With source you can get things when they hit stable branches
upstream. I did exactly one binary deployment, waited forever for a patch I
needed, and swore off doing it that way forever more.

Operations are the same either way really.

...
> 3. Is there any document to describe how to operation kolla deployment
> OpenStack, seems it's not the quite same with the bare metal deployment.
>

The deployment docs are quite good. There isn't really a good ops guide
though. This is true of bare metal as well though ( in process of being
addressed presently). The IRC channel is terrific though, so if you hit a
wall, pop on there and ask for help or email this list with a tag like you
did here.

>
> Thanks.
>
> Best Regards
> -- Ray
>

Cherrs,
Erik

_______________________________________________
> Mailing list:
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe :
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>

Eric,
Thanks for your reply.

I just consider one senario: if I deployed use source, if source is
updated, do I need to rebuild the docker image and do an update? Or is
there any better way?

Best Regards
-- Ray


On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:22 AM Erik McCormick <emccormick@cirrusseven.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 8:46 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> OpenStackers,
>> I have several questions for using kolla deployment in production:
>>
> 1. Binary or source? Which one is mostly used in production
>>
>
> I've heard a lot more reports from people running source, but this is
> anecdotal
>
> 2. Which one is easy to operation, like updating..
>>
>
> IMHO source is better for updates. With binary you sit around waiting for
> packages to decide a patch or stable milestone is worthy of dropping new
> packages. With source you can get things when they hit stable branches
> upstream. I did exactly one binary deployment, waited forever for a patch I
> needed, and swore off doing it that way forever more.
>
> Operations are the same either way really.
>
> ...
>> 3. Is there any document to describe how to operation kolla deployment
>> OpenStack, seems it's not the quite same with the bare metal deployment.
>>
>
> The deployment docs are quite good. There isn't really a good ops guide
> though. This is true of bare metal as well though ( in process of being
> addressed presently). The IRC channel is terrific though, so if you hit a
> wall, pop on there and ask for help or email this list with a tag like you
> did here.
>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Best Regards
>> -- Ray
>>
>
> Cherrs,
> Erik
>
> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list:
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
>> Unsubscribe :
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>
>

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 10:47 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:

> Eric,
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> I just consider one senario: if I deployed use source, if source is
> updated, do I need to rebuild the docker image and do an update? Or is
> there any better way?
>
> Best Regards
> -- Ray
>

If you want the updates, then build new containers with new tags and run
the upgrade playbook. You can do this even just for one project.

The process is the same for binary or source. If you want updates, build
new containers with newer tags. You don't upgrade the already-running
containers in place.

-Erik


>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:22 AM Erik McCormick <
> emccormick@cirrusseven.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 8:46 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OpenStackers,
>>> I have several questions for using kolla deployment in production:
>>>
>> 1. Binary or source? Which one is mostly used in production
>>>
>>
>> I've heard a lot more reports from people running source, but this is
>> anecdotal
>>
>> 2. Which one is easy to operation, like updating..
>>>
>>
>> IMHO source is better for updates. With binary you sit around waiting for
>> packages to decide a patch or stable milestone is worthy of dropping new
>> packages. With source you can get things when they hit stable branches
>> upstream. I did exactly one binary deployment, waited forever for a patch I
>> needed, and swore off doing it that way forever more.
>>
>> Operations are the same either way really.
>>
>> ...
>>> 3. Is there any document to describe how to operation kolla deployment
>>> OpenStack, seems it's not the quite same with the bare metal deployment.
>>>
>>
>> The deployment docs are quite good. There isn't really a good ops guide
>> though. This is true of bare metal as well though ( in process of being
>> addressed presently). The IRC channel is terrific though, so if you hit a
>> wall, pop on there and ask for help or email this list with a tag like you
>> did here.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> -- Ray
>>>
>>
>> Cherrs,
>> Erik
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list:
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
>>> Unsubscribe :
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>
>>

Ok, thanks for the info.
Best Regards
-- Ray


On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:35 AM Erik McCormick <emccormick@cirrusseven.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 10:47 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Eric,
>> Thanks for your reply.
>>
>> I just consider one senario: if I deployed use source, if source is
>> updated, do I need to rebuild the docker image and do an update? Or is
>> there any better way?
>>
>> Best Regards
>> -- Ray
>>
>
> If you want the updates, then build new containers with new tags and run
> the upgrade playbook. You can do this even just for one project.
>
> The process is the same for binary or source. If you want updates, build
> new containers with newer tags. You don't upgrade the already-running
> containers in place.
>
> -Erik
>
>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:22 AM Erik McCormick <
>> emccormick@cirrusseven.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 8:46 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> OpenStackers,
>>>> I have several questions for using kolla deployment in production:
>>>>
>>> 1. Binary or source? Which one is mostly used in production
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've heard a lot more reports from people running source, but this is
>>> anecdotal
>>>
>>> 2. Which one is easy to operation, like updating..
>>>>
>>>
>>> IMHO source is better for updates. With binary you sit around waiting
>>> for packages to decide a patch or stable milestone is worthy of dropping
>>> new packages. With source you can get things when they hit stable branches
>>> upstream. I did exactly one binary deployment, waited forever for a patch I
>>> needed, and swore off doing it that way forever more.
>>>
>>> Operations are the same either way really.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>> 3. Is there any document to describe how to operation kolla deployment
>>>> OpenStack, seems it's not the quite same with the bare metal deployment.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The deployment docs are quite good. There isn't really a good ops guide
>>> though. This is true of bare metal as well though ( in process of being
>>> addressed presently). The IRC channel is terrific though, so if you hit a
>>> wall, pop on there and ask for help or email this list with a tag like you
>>> did here.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards
>>>> -- Ray
>>>>
>>>
>>> Cherrs,
>>> Erik
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mailing list:
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>
>>>

Eric,
I discussed upgrade action today with my colleagues, our purpose is a
little difference. We want to create an ISO with kolla images and help our
customer install OpenStack in an offline way. But for upgrade each time,
user's environment always can't access to the internet, and each time I
need to copy the docker exported file, it's very large and it seems it's
not worth to update one file but copy a 1G file.

I am not quite sure there is other way to handle this scenarios.


Thanks.
Best Regards
-- Ray


On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 12:14 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, thanks for the info.
> Best Regards
> -- Ray
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:35 AM Erik McCormick <
> emccormick@cirrusseven.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 10:47 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Eric,
>>> Thanks for your reply.
>>>
>>> I just consider one senario: if I deployed use source, if source is
>>> updated, do I need to rebuild the docker image and do an update? Or is
>>> there any better way?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> -- Ray
>>>
>>
>> If you want the updates, then build new containers with new tags and run
>> the upgrade playbook. You can do this even just for one project.
>>
>> The process is the same for binary or source. If you want updates, build
>> new containers with newer tags. You don't upgrade the already-running
>> containers in place.
>>
>> -Erik
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:22 AM Erik McCormick <
>>> emccormick@cirrusseven.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 8:46 PM Ray Sun <xiaoquqi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> OpenStackers,
>>>>> I have several questions for using kolla deployment in production:
>>>>>
>>>> 1. Binary or source? Which one is mostly used in production
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've heard a lot more reports from people running source, but this is
>>>> anecdotal
>>>>
>>>> 2. Which one is easy to operation, like updating..
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IMHO source is better for updates. With binary you sit around waiting
>>>> for packages to decide a patch or stable milestone is worthy of dropping
>>>> new packages. With source you can get things when they hit stable branches
>>>> upstream. I did exactly one binary deployment, waited forever for a patch I
>>>> needed, and swore off doing it that way forever more.
>>>>
>>>> Operations are the same either way really.
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>> 3. Is there any document to describe how to operation kolla deployment
>>>>> OpenStack, seems it's not the quite same with the bare metal deployment.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The deployment docs are quite good. There isn't really a good ops guide
>>>> though. This is true of bare metal as well though ( in process of being
>>>> addressed presently). The IRC channel is terrific though, so if you hit a
>>>> wall, pop on there and ask for help or email this list with a tag like you
>>>> did here.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>> -- Ray
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cherrs,
>>>> Erik
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Mailing list:
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
>>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>
>>>>