Hi, Vladimir! I think that option (2) 'to backup the master node, then reinstall it from scratch and then apply backup' is a better way for upgrade. In that way we are concentrating on two problems in one feature: backups and upgrades. That will ease development, testing and also reduce feature creep.
P.S. It is hard to refer to (2) because You have thee (2)-s. On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Vladimir Kozhukalov < vkozhuka...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > At the moment I'm working on deprecating Fuel upgrade tarball. Currently, > it includes the following: > > * RPM repository (upstream + mos) > * DEB repository (mos) > * openstack.yaml > * version.yaml > * upgrade script itself (+ virtualenv) > > Apart from upgrading docker containers this upgrade script makes copies of > the RPM/DEB repositories and puts them on the master node naming these > repository directories depending on what is written in openstack.yaml and > version.yaml. My plan was something like: > > 1) deprecate version.yaml (move all fields from there to various places) > 2) deliver openstack.yaml with fuel-openstack-metadata package > 3) do not put new repos on the master node (instead we should use online > repos or use fuel-createmirror to make local mirrors) > 4) deliver fuel-upgrade package (throw away upgrade virtualenv) > > Then UX was supposed to be roughly like: > > 1) configure /etc/yum.repos.d/nailgun.repo (add new RPM MOS repo) > 2) yum install fuel-upgrade > 3) /usr/bin/fuel-upgrade (script was going to become lighter, because > there should have not be parts coping RPM/DEB repos) > > However, it turned out that Fuel 8.0 is going to be run on Centos 7 and it > is not enough to just do things which we usually did during upgrades. Now > there are two ways to upgrade: > 1) to use the official Centos upgrade script for upgrading from 6 to 7 > 2) to backup the master node, then reinstall it from scratch and then > apply backup > > Upgrade team is trying to understand which way is more appropriate. > Regarding to my tarball related activities, I'd say that this package based > upgrade approach can be aligned with (1) (fuel-upgrade would use official > Centos upgrade script as a first step for upgrade), but it definitely can > not be aligned with (2), because it assumes reinstalling the master node > from scratch. > > Right now, I'm finishing the work around deprecating version.yaml and my > further steps would be to modify fuel-upgrade script so it does not copy > RPM/DEB repos, but those steps make little sense taking into account Centos > 7 feature. > > Colleagues, let's make a decision about how we are going to upgrade the > master node ASAP. Probably my tarball related work should be reduced to > just throwing tarball away. > > > Vladimir Kozhukalov > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- Kind Regards, Alexandr Kostrikov, Mirantis, Inc. 35b/3, Vorontsovskaya St., 109147, Moscow, Russia Tel.: +7 (495) 640-49-04 Tel.: +7 (925) 716-64-52 <%2B7%20%28906%29%20740-64-79> Skype: akostrikov_mirantis E-mail: akostri...@mirantis.com <elogut...@mirantis.com> *www.mirantis.com <http://www.mirantis.ru/>* *www.mirantis.ru <http://www.mirantis.ru/>*
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
