proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Hi, since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly builds, I suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branches nightly will be more useful. -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Hi, since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly builds, I suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branches nightly will be more useful.
Why is that? Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple nightly.
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
Il 16/01/2014 11:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Hi, since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly builds, I suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branches nightly will be more useful.
Why is that?
Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple nightly.
nightly requires 6GB of disk space and we have just 3GB left there. We're short on resources for having multiple nightlies right now.
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --WcmmmQWa59sABupxnMbxod1UnoAffcSEX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable El jue 16 ene 2014 11:15:52 CET, Sandro Bonazzola escribi=C3=B3:
Il 16/01/2014 11:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Hi, since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly build=
s, I
suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branche= s nightly will be more useful.
Why is that?
Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple n= ightly.
nightly requires 6GB of disk space and we have just 3GB left there. We're short on resources for having multiple nightlies right now.
I correct myself, right now nightly takes ~3GB of space. I can try to=20 make some space, but if the repo size increases a little we'll run out=20 f space there.
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaborat=
ion.
See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
-- David Caro Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Email: dcaro@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605 --WcmmmQWa59sABupxnMbxod1UnoAffcSEX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS17IBAAoJEEBxx+HSYmnDz8kH/2MkVdOSteThGAuU77NHx+Mv f34ixr/GEKQJru5o/meMeT4t/z76+GW9LWgFQ6JzzsF+tfv/8xQ4xW7a3Ilrod25 LEBGE9MpY6i8NDC2ik9mmEWEHFpup8i0E3/kiX6zCXWtF5St9nens/4Ao1B6Fe1e kRlPMYrwocIt60wrwfoBY5kkkQxZws8NBPmIkyOA7MuoS8CD2AaMfCeM18bZWCRS zrhsI2d4iP/PveJB6o72p/d7t2A0eu77TgdzNIIPVtTo77RJYaRIGrjZlWwI9jeP q0HYzd9eUq6VBjHK2AVn1JK26+vxtePYaDk+tmQlifrlpPr5N6WTQRQZH6pD5F8= =7pjN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --WcmmmQWa59sABupxnMbxod1UnoAffcSEX--
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Caro" <dcaroest@redhat.com> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:18:41 PM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
El jue 16 ene 2014 11:15:52 CET, Sandro Bonazzola escribió:
Il 16/01/2014 11:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Hi, since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly builds, I suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branches nightly will be more useful.
Why is that?
Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple nightly.
nightly requires 6GB of disk space and we have just 3GB left there. We're short on resources for having multiple nightlies right now.
I correct myself, right now nightly takes ~3GB of space. I can try to make some space, but if the repo size increases a little we'll run out f space there.
if nobody will test master then we will be in big problem when trying to stabilize it.
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
-- David Caro
Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Email: dcaro@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605
On 01/16/2014 12:37 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Caro" <dcaroest@redhat.com> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:18:41 PM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
El jue 16 ene 2014 11:15:52 CET, Sandro Bonazzola escribió:
Il 16/01/2014 11:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Hi, since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly builds, I suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branches nightly will be more useful.
Why is that?
Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple nightly.
nightly requires 6GB of disk space and we have just 3GB left there. We're short on resources for having multiple nightlies right now.
I correct myself, right now nightly takes ~3GB of space. I can try to make some space, but if the repo size increases a little we'll run out f space there.
if nobody will test master then we will be in big problem when trying to stabilize it.
agree - we need master tested and we should have nightlies on it as well
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
-- David Caro
Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Email: dcaro@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605
_______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
Il 16/01/2014 12:51, Itamar Heim ha scritto:
On 01/16/2014 12:37 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Caro" <dcaroest@redhat.com> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:18:41 PM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
El jue 16 ene 2014 11:15:52 CET, Sandro Bonazzola escribió:
Il 16/01/2014 11:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Hi, since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly builds, I suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branches nightly will be more useful.
Why is that?
Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple nightly.
nightly requires 6GB of disk space and we have just 3GB left there. We're short on resources for having multiple nightlies right now.
I correct myself, right now nightly takes ~3GB of space. I can try to make some space, but if the repo size increases a little we'll run out f space there.
if nobody will test master then we will be in big problem when trying to stabilize it.
agree - we need master tested and we should have nightlies on it as well
We'll need more storage then... Just to understand how much we need and if we can gather it, how many nightly has to be taken for allowing rollback? just latest and previous? Ignore rollback and just keep latest?
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
-- David Caro
Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Email: dcaro@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605
_______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com>, "David Caro" <dcaroest@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 5:59:42 PM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Il 16/01/2014 12:51, Itamar Heim ha scritto:
On 01/16/2014 12:37 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Caro" <dcaroest@redhat.com> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:18:41 PM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
El jue 16 ene 2014 11:15:52 CET, Sandro Bonazzola escribió:
Il 16/01/2014 11:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto:
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> > To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM > Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch > > Hi, > since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly > builds, I > suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. > At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 branches > nightly will be more useful.
Why is that?
Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple nightly.
nightly requires 6GB of disk space and we have just 3GB left there. We're short on resources for having multiple nightlies right now.
I correct myself, right now nightly takes ~3GB of space. I can try to make some space, but if the repo size increases a little we'll run out f space there.
if nobody will test master then we will be in big problem when trying to stabilize it.
agree - we need master tested and we should have nightlies on it as well
We'll need more storage then...
Agree.
Just to understand how much we need and if we can gather it, how many nightly has to be taken for allowing rollback? just latest and previous? Ignore rollback and just keep latest?
Currently we planned to have nightly for each version: ovirt-<version>-snapshot - for nightly builds ovirt-snapshot - master nightly ovirt-<version> - released version So we need some more space to handle that. To avoid RPM dups on the filesystem, we can create a root directory to save RPMs there and use hardlinks. For example: Packages-<version> - | - rpm1, rpm2 ... and link rpms from ovirt-<version>-snapshot and ovirt-<version> to Packages-<version>. In that way you will avoid dup rpms. Kiril
> > > -- > Sandro Bonazzola > Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community > collaboration. > See how it works at redhat.com > _______________________________________________ > Arch mailing list > Arch@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch >
-- David Caro
Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Email: dcaro@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605
_______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kiril Nesenko" <knesenko@redhat.com> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org> Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 11:35:47 AM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com>, "David Caro" <dcaroest@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 5:59:42 PM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
Il 16/01/2014 12:51, Itamar Heim ha scritto:
On 01/16/2014 12:37 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Caro" <dcaroest@redhat.com> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> Cc: "arch" <arch@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:18:41 PM Subject: Re: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch
El jue 16 ene 2014 11:15:52 CET, Sandro Bonazzola escribió:
Il 16/01/2014 11:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> >> To: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch@ovirt.org> >> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:09:46 PM >> Subject: proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch >> >> Hi, >> since it seems not possible to have both master and 3.4 nightly >> builds, I >> suggest to move nightly to 3.4 branches. >> At this stage nobody really needs master nightly, while 3.4.0 >> branches >> nightly will be more useful. > > Why is that? > > Kiril is working on splitting repo per version, so you have multiple > nightly.
nightly requires 6GB of disk space and we have just 3GB left there. We're short on resources for having multiple nightlies right now.
I correct myself, right now nightly takes ~3GB of space. I can try to make some space, but if the repo size increases a little we'll run out f space there.
if nobody will test master then we will be in big problem when trying to stabilize it.
agree - we need master tested and we should have nightlies on it as well
We'll need more storage then...
Agree.
we tried doing that with adding storage to rackspace, but we hit a wall there with various ticket problems regarding firewall issues and other restrictions which forced us to look for other alternatives. i'm still trying to think on how best configuration on softlayer going forward, with a dedicated storage server, that might solve the issue, but that could take a while. meantime, i think the simplest solution is just to increase space on resourcs.ovirt.org or to move the gerrit backups (9.5GB) somewhere else.
Just to understand how much we need and if we can gather it, how many nightly has to be taken for allowing rollback? just latest and previous? Ignore rollback and just keep latest?
Currently we planned to have nightly for each version:
ovirt-<version>-snapshot - for nightly builds ovirt-snapshot - master nightly ovirt-<version> - released version
So we need some more space to handle that. To avoid RPM dups on the filesystem, we can create a root directory to save RPMs there and use hardlinks. For example:
Packages-<version> - | - rpm1, rpm2 ...
and link rpms from ovirt-<version>-snapshot and ovirt-<version> to Packages-<version>.
In that way you will avoid dup rpms.
this will surely help as well +1 and the refactoring of the cleanup script for deleting old nighthly rpms also.
Kiril
> >> >> >> -- >> Sandro Bonazzola >> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community >> collaboration. >> See how it works at redhat.com >> _______________________________________________ >> Arch mailing list >> Arch@ovirt.org >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch >>
-- David Caro
Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Email: dcaro@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605
_______________________________________________ Arch mailing list Arch@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
participants (6)
-
Alon Bar-Lev -
David Caro -
Eyal Edri -
Itamar Heim -
Kiril Nesenko -
Sandro Bonazzola