On Tue, 12 May 2015 17:34:24 -0600
Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2015 17:16:09 -0600
Tim Flink <tflink(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2015 13:09:33 -0600
> Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 9 May 2015 12:05:04 -0600
> > Tim Flink <tflink(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This was brought up a little while ago and we decided to put off
> > > the discussion a little bit but I'd like to re-start the
> > > conversation before we get too much farther with disposable
> > > clients.
> > >
> > > My plan for how our hosts would be set up once we deploy support
> > > for disposable clients is this:
> > > - virthosts would have N buildslave processes running on them
> > > - each buildslave would launch VMs for disposable clients as
> > > needed
> > > - each virthost would have access to a shared filesystem used
> > > to store at least VM images, maybe logs and other data
> >
> > Thats each virthost, not all virthosts having the same storage
> > right?
>
> All of the virthosts (at least in each group of dev/stg/prod) would
> have a chunk of shared storage used to store the canonical VM images
> that we use to boot the disposable clients (the disk changes would
> be done locally to the virthosts). This way we only have to build
> them once instead of once per virthost.
Would it be feasable to just build them once and rsync them between
hosts? Or would you prefer shared storage?
Honestly, that hadn't even occurred to me. I think it may end up
depending on how we kick off the image builds but that sounds much
easier and more reliable than a shared filesystem.
> In the back of my head, I'm thinking that it may make sense
to store
> logs and artifacts on a chunk of shared storage instead of
> transferring everything to the taskotron master using buildbot. I
> figure that may make sense if the shared storage is already set up
> but this hasn't gotten past the "thinking about it" stage yet :).
Yeah. We may be able to do a netapp nfs volume, we will have to see
what all we can do once we move to our new c-mode filer.
I think it may be a little while before we're ready to look at doing
something different for the logs and shared storage - still at step 1
"make it work" in this whole process but will keep it in mind.
Thanks,
Tim