On 09/20/11 - 11:44:20PM, Ian Main wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 05:09:55PM -0400, Chris Lalancette wrote:
> All,
> This is a patch series to remove condor from the conductor. In short,
> condor presents problems for our project because it is an external project, it
> is written in C++ (while most of our developers are ruby), and it is too complex
> for our current needs.
> The new way we do scheduling is described pretty well in patch 1, so I
> won't delve into it here. Since the last posting, there have been a few more
> bugs fixed:
>
> 1) jprovazn finally found an ActiveRecord incantation that works for
> re-establishing a connection to a database, so the dbomatic subprocesses don't
> trample over each other
> 2) I had to fix several bugs when running dbomatic under systemd. I can go
> into the gory details if you want, just ping me on IRC :)
> 3) imain discovered that the broken Download Key links are independent of this
> patchset, so we don't have to worry about that.
>
> There are also some outstanding TODO items, but which can be postponed until
> later:
>
> 1) We are still not properly generating the instance name. In condor, we did
> this by generating a UUID that would be the instance name, then truncating that
> UUID to the maximum length that deltacloud told us an instance name could be
> for a particular backend. I'm thinking we want to do the same here.
> 2) imain believes we can do away with the Task class completely now. That
> would be a nice cleanup
> 3) When launching large deployments, the "Launch Deployment" page can be
slow
> to return. That's because in the background we are issuing one deltacloud call
> at a time to launch each instance in the deployment. We probably want to fork
> off a separate process for each deployment so we don't hold up the UI process.
>
> I've personally tested the patches using the EC2 backend, where things seem to
> be working well. I was able to launch 5 deployments for a total of 15
> instances simultaneously without issue. I also tested up to a 4 assembly
> deployable which seemed to work.
>
> At this point, I'm relatively happy with this patchset and I think we should
> commit it barring any major problems found in testing. The enhancements above
> can be done as additional patches on top of this.
>
> Please review and ACK.
ACK'd it is. This is working well for me in my testing. Like Chris
says we have some follow up things to address but in general this is
working very well and is far more simple than using condor for this
task.
Thank you Chris and others for all your work on this.
Thanks, I've pushed this now.
--
Chris Lalancette