Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove Storage Cluster from Virtual Site Deployments #153

Closed
lb4368 opened this issue May 25, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Remove Storage Cluster from Virtual Site Deployments #153

lb4368 opened this issue May 25, 2021 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request priority/critical Items critical to be implemented, usually by the next release size m 2-5 days [moderate complexity, generic code, or enhancement to existing feature]]
Milestone

Comments

@lb4368
Copy link

lb4368 commented May 25, 2021

Problem description
The Zuul gates which do the virtual site deployments have been failing often with timeouts. It is believed that some of this may be related to the Rook deployment of the Ceph storage cluster using too many resources within the virtual environments. It is suggested to remove the storage cluster composite deployment from the virtual test sites. The storage cluster deployment would remain in the reference baremetal site deployments.

Proposed change
This patchset (https://review.opendev.org/c/airship/treasuremap/+/792694) makes the storage cluster composite deployment a part of the target workload phase for both the airship-core and multi-tenant types. Once merged, this makes the storage cluster deployment a part of any site inheriting one of these types. We are requesting that target workload phase for the virtual sites (test-site and virtual-network-cloud) overrides the type setting to omit the deployment of the storage cluster (manifests/composite/storage-cluster).

The storage-cluster composite needs to continue to be deployed as part of the baremetal reference sites.

@lb4368 lb4368 added enhancement New feature or request triage labels May 25, 2021
@mattmceuen mattmceuen added priority/critical Items critical to be implemented, usually by the next release and removed triage labels May 26, 2021
@mattmceuen mattmceuen added this to the v2.1 milestone May 26, 2021
@SirishaGopigiri
Copy link
Contributor

Please assign this to me

@SirishaGopigiri
Copy link
Contributor

Size would be 'M'

@eak13 eak13 added the size m 2-5 days [moderate complexity, generic code, or enhancement to existing feature]] label Jun 4, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request priority/critical Items critical to be implemented, usually by the next release size m 2-5 days [moderate complexity, generic code, or enhancement to existing feature]]
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants