Please see inline. ___________________________________________________________________ Kris Lindgren Senior Linux Systems Engineer GoDaddy
On 10/7/15, 6:12 AM, "Tim Bell" <tim.b...@cern.ch> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Daniel P. Berrange [mailto:berra...@redhat.com] >> Sent: 07 October 2015 13:25 >> To: Tim Bell <tim.b...@cern.ch> >> Cc: Sean Dague <s...@dague.net>; OpenStack Development Mailing List >> (not for usage questions) <openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>; openstack- >> operat...@lists.openstack.org >> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [nova] Min libvirt for >> Mitaka is 0.10.2 and suggest Nxxx uses 1.1.1 >> >> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 11:13:12AM +0000, Tim Bell wrote: >> > >> > Although Red Hat is no longer supporting RHEL 6 after Icehouse, a >> > number of users such as GoDaddy and CERN are using Software >> > Collections to run the Python 2.7 code. >> >> Do you have any educated guess as to when you might switch to deploying >> new OpenStack version exclusively on RHEL 7 ? I understand such a switch is >> likely to take a while so you can test its performance and reliability and >> so on, >> but I'm assuming you'll eventually switch ? >> > >I think we'll be all 7 by spring next year (i.e. when we install Liberty). The >software collections work is not for the faint hearted and 7 brings lots of >good things with it for operations so we want to get there as soon as >possible. Thus, I think we'd be fine with a change in Mitaka (especially given >the points you mention below). Like CERN, we don't currently plan on doing the software collections + venv trick past kilo. We plan on having all of our HV's running cent 7+ before we move to liberty. That said, Liberty should still technically work under CentOS 6... I am ok dropping support for RHEL/CentOS 6 in N. > >> > However, since this modification would only take place when Mitaka >> > gets released, this would realistically give those sites a year to >> > complete migration to RHEL/CentOS 7 assuming they are running from one >> > of the community editions. >> > >> > What does the 1.1.1 version bring that is the motivation for raising >> > the limit ? >> >> If we require 1.1.1 we could have unconditional support for >> >> - Hot-unplug of PCI devices (needs 1.1.1) >> - Live snapshots (needs 1.0.0) >> - Live volume snapshotting (needs 1.1.1) >> - Disk sector discard support (needs 1.0.6) >> - Hyper-V clock tunables (needs 1.0.0 & 1.1.0) >> >> If you lack those versions, in case of hotunplug, and live volume snapshots >> we just refuse the corresponding API call. With live snapshots we fallback >> to >> non-live snapshots. For disk discard and hyperv clock we just run with >> degraded functionality. The lack of hyperv clock tunables means Windows >> guests will have unreliable time keeping and are likely to suffer random >> BSOD, which I think is a particularly important issue. >> >> And of course we remove a bunch of conditional logic from Nova which >> simplifies the code paths and removes code paths which rarely get testing >> coverage. >> >> Regards, >> Daniel >> -- >> |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ >> :| >> |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org >> :| >> |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ >> :| >> |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc >> :| _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
