On 3/21/2014 6:45 PM, Florian Chazal wrote:
Hi All,
Better late that never:
Since few weeks we are testing IBM Power System R2 server and we were
evaluating the capability to go on a larger scale. We are lacking of
information regarding PowerKVM status and PowerVC so we began to try
Havana + powerVM:
The launch of a VM went well (except an issue with glance which does not
gzip the image ... troubleshoot in process) but how does it works
regarding the network ? What type of network configuration it has been
tested with ?
Thank you in advance,
Florian CHAZAL
On 25 November 2013 08:26, Matt Riedemann <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
<mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote:
On Monday, November 25, 2013 10:14:00 AM, Anne Gentle wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:10 AM, Thierry Carrez
<thie...@openstack.org <mailto:thie...@openstack.org>
<mailto:thie...@openstack.org <mailto:thie...@openstack.org>>__>
wrote:
Chuck Short wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Michael Still
<mi...@stillhq.com <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com>
<mailto:mi...@stillhq.com <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com>>
> <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com>
<mailto:mi...@stillhq.com <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com>>>> wrote:
>
>> So, a few questions...
>>
>> - If there are no users shall we remove it from
Havana and
Grizzly as
>> well, or does that violate our stability principles
too much?
>
>
> Speaking with my stable maintainers hat on I would personally
NACK this
> since
> it doesnt meet the standard of a stable maintenance
requirement,
imho.
It definitely doesn't meet our stable maintenance rules. We
want
people
to be able to safely upgrade to the latest stable/* when
they are
users
of the release. We don't add new features, removing them
would be even
worse.
>> - If we don't remove the code from stable, what about
removing all
>> references from the stable docs and putting in a warning
saying that
>> powervm is a dead end instead? I want to minimise
confusion
on the
>> part of people deploying stable releases.
>
> This would be okay in my opinion.
At the very minimum I would add the "dead-end" comment to
the Havana
release notes. If Anne is fine by it, it could also be
added to the
stable/havana version of the docs.
PowerVM was mostly documented in developer docs in the nova repo. It
also has entries in the Configuration Reference in the nova.conf
options tables from our autodoc process. Those will just stay in the
stable/havana repo, but I'm okay with backporting a note to
stable/havana with a clear message as to the driver's fate. We also
have a mention of PowerVM in stable/grizzly where we could also
place
a note. Release notes are a good place for this as well, thanks
Russell.
Tracking with
https://bugs.launchpad.net/__openstack-manuals/+bug/1254780
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1254780> --
feel free
to add the nova project as well to ensure the docs in the nova repo
are removed.
I do want to point out that we don't have adequate documentation of
other drivers, like Hyper-V and Xen, just want to make sure you all
know there are gaps and documentation isn't the indicator of
"acceptance" of a hypervisor driver.
Thanks -
Anne
--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
_________________________________________________
Mailing list:
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack>
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:openstack@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org>>
Unsubscribe :
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack>
_________________________________________________
Mailing list:
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack>
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org>
Unsubscribe :
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack>
Also to relay what was discussed in nova IRC this morning, this
topic is on the release meeting agenda for tomorrow:
https://wiki.openstack.org/__wiki/Meetings/ProjectMeeting#__Agenda_for_next_meeting
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ProjectMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting>
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
_________________________________________________
Mailing list:
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack>
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org>
Unsubscribe :
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack>
--
Florian Chazal
Hi Florian,
Some details on what testing we did internally with running Tempest:
- Controller/Compute Node: RHEL 6.3-6.5, Fedora 19 ppc64
- Hypervisor: PowerVM IVM 2.2.2.0+
- Platform: P7 and P7+ Racks, Blades, ITEs
- Networking:
- Neutron + Open vSwitch: Flat, VLAN - IPv4 only
- nova-network: Flat
- Cinder Storage Driver: Storwize/SVC 6.4.1/6.4.2 for FC
There are some teams here working on getting a PowerVC nova virt driver
into Stackforge.
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
_______________________________________________
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
