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

Move again NFS server after EDPM deploy #1407

Merged

Conversation

tosky
Copy link
Contributor

@tosky tosky commented Apr 5, 2024

Otherwise the target EDPM node has no full networking setup, which means the choosen VLAN where to expose

This means that any usage of NFS should be moved to the post_deploy phase, possibly reconfiguring an existing control plane.

This mirror the similar mechanism used to configure and use Ceph on EDPM nodes.

As a pull request owner and reviewers, I checked that:

  • Appropriate testing is done and actually running
  • Appropriate documentation exists and/or is up-to-date:
    • Content of the docs/source is reflecting the changes

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 5, 2024

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@tosky tosky force-pushed the edpm-nfs-server branch from 4e4ba9b to 6fe4f0c Compare April 7, 2024 14:16
@tosky
Copy link
Contributor Author

tosky commented Apr 7, 2024

Temporarily integrated #1409 to check whether zuul is really able to combine two changes on the same github repository.

@tosky tosky force-pushed the edpm-nfs-server branch from 6fe4f0c to f3e9dd0 Compare April 8, 2024 07:33
Copy link

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://review.rdoproject.org/zuul/buildset/90615520f08d46f7921eb2c23de27435

✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 2h 31m 05s
podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc MERGE_CONFLICT in 3s
✔️ podified-multinode-hci-deployment-crc SUCCESS in 1h 30m 04s
✔️ cifmw-data-plane-adoption-osp-17-to-extracted-crc SUCCESS in 2h 12m 53s
✔️ noop SUCCESS in 0s
✔️ cifmw-pod-pre-commit SUCCESS in 7m 25s (non-voting)

@tosky tosky force-pushed the edpm-nfs-server branch from f3e9dd0 to f2e6369 Compare April 9, 2024 08:26
@cjeanner
Copy link
Contributor

@tosky hello! Is this still relevant? If so, care to mark it "ready for review" and advertise it? Thanks!

@tosky tosky force-pushed the edpm-nfs-server branch from f2e6369 to a19c7c2 Compare April 29, 2024 08:08
@tosky
Copy link
Contributor Author

tosky commented Apr 29, 2024

It is still relevant but several unrelated issues prevented me from testing it, and now I have troubles understanding what is failing. But it is still definitely relevant, and I don't think I can mark it as ready yet.

@tosky tosky marked this pull request as ready for review May 7, 2024 12:01
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from dsariel and queria May 7, 2024 12:01
@tosky tosky requested review from cescgina and pablintino May 7, 2024 12:02
@tosky tosky force-pushed the edpm-nfs-server branch 2 times, most recently from 82e28d6 to 6667d21 Compare May 7, 2024 13:28
Copy link

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://review.rdoproject.org/zuul/buildset/44a86407652a4388bc47eded7a1debfe

✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 2h 51m 40s
✔️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SUCCESS in 1h 19m 42s
podified-multinode-hci-deployment-crc FAILURE in 1h 10m 55s
✔️ cifmw-data-plane-adoption-osp-17-to-extracted-crc SUCCESS in 2h 31m 01s
✔️ noop SUCCESS in 0s
✔️ cifmw-pod-ansible-test SUCCESS in 9m 42s
✔️ cifmw-pod-pre-commit SUCCESS in 10m 50s
✔️ cifmw-molecule-edpm_prepare SUCCESS in 4m 40s

Otherwise the target EDPM node has no full networking setup,
which means the choosen VLAN where to expose

This means that any usage of NFS should be moved to the post_deploy
phase, possibly reconfiguring an existing control plane.

This mirror the similar mechanism used to configure and use
Ceph on EDPM nodes.
@tosky tosky force-pushed the edpm-nfs-server branch from 6667d21 to 02d8a1d Compare May 9, 2024 08:14
@pablintino
Copy link
Collaborator

/approve

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented May 9, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: pablintino

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved label May 9, 2024
@pablintino
Copy link
Collaborator

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label May 9, 2024
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit b14d023 into openstack-k8s-operators:main May 9, 2024
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants