Re: [ovirt-devel] ovirt-provider-ovn - appliance inclusion / default enablement

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Yedidyah Bar David <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Yedidyah Bar David <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Sandro Bonazzola <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> with https://gerrit.ovirt.org/76855 it's requested to increase the appliance size by adding ovirt-provider-ovn and its dependencies. >>>>> >>>>> This raise a few questions. >>>>> The support for ovirt-provider-ovn is enabled by default in engine-setup and going to be installed by default in the appliance so we're pushing to use it. >>>>> Why not requiring it at ovirt-engine spec file level? >>>>> Answer given in the commit message of above patch is: >>>>> >>>>> We do not want to have a hard dependency in the >>>>> form of an rpm require. >>>>> OVN and openvswitch are relatively heavy and complex, >>>>> and are still experimental. We would not want to >>>>> force everybody to pull them onto any Engine host. >>>>> >>>>> So why adding it to the appliance, which is the default for hosted engine which is our recommeded way to deploy oVirt, and enable it by default? >>>>> >>>>> How this differs from DWH? ovirt-engine requires ovirt-engine-setup which requires ovirt-engine-dwh setup which requires ovirt-engine-dwh. >>>>> Why can't we just require ovirt-provider-ovn in ovirt-engine instead of tweaking the appliance? >>>>> >>>>> If we decide it's not mandatory, why not make the default to not enabling it in engine-setup and avoid to add it to the appliance? >>>>> Being optional, adding it collides with Bug 1401931 - [RFE] reduce the size of the appliance >>>> >>>> Much like with DWH, I can envisage a use case where ovirt-provider-ovn >>>> sits on a remote host, rather than on Engine's. However, the default >>>> use case is to place them on the same host. >>>> >>>> I thought that it would be a good idea to include OVN on the >>>> appliance, as a means to showcase this new and exciting feature of >>>> oVirt. However, it is not a must. We can say that we'd like to keep >>>> the appliance small; if someone wants to use OVN with it, let them run >>>> ovirt-engine-setup manually, and pull in the dependencies. >>> >>> The appliance is assumed to (soon?) be our standard installation flow, >>> not a way to showcase things. For the latter, you might want to add ovn >>> to ovirt-live or to the ovirt demo tool [1] (not yet released IIUC). >>> >>> [1] https://trello.com/b/wocfflzf/sales-demo-tool-lago-based >>> >>>> >>>> For this we'd need to flip the default, and not install OVN when the >>>> appliance is created, and skip OVN test in the offline test suite. >>> >>> +1 >> >> Could you point us to the answer file used for appliance creation? > > Do you want to keep the default True for non-appliance? My +1 above > was also for reverting the default, not only in appliance. Oh. I still want to have OVN by default for non-appliance. I like this feature, and I want to entice people to use it.

For appliance I understand that we have a size limitation, so ok, let us not bloat it up.

I hope you are also fine with disabling ovn in the following answer file. > > The appliance-supplied answer file seems is: > > https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-appliance.git;a=blob;f=engine-app... > > When hosted-engine --deploy is using the appliance, and if the user > asks to run engine-setup automatically, it uses above file, > but also adds another file, auto-generated, see here: > > https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-hosted-engine-setup.git;a=blob;f=... > > None of them has the answer for OVN. Latter has: > > DIALOG/autoAcceptDefault=bool:True > > For this, see: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270719