proposal for moving nightly to 3.4 stabilization branch

[Eyal Edri]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kiril Nesenko" <knesenko at redhat.com>
> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo at redhat.com>
> Cc: "arch" <arch at ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra at 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 at redhat.com>
> > To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim at redhat.com>, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl at redhat.com>,
> > "David Caro" <dcaroest at redhat.com>
> > Cc: "arch" <arch at ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra at 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 at redhat.com>
> > >>> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo at redhat.com>
> > >>> Cc: "arch" <arch at ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra at ovirt.org>, "Alon Bar-Lev"
> > >>> <alonbl at 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 at redhat.com>
> > >>>>>> To: "infra" <infra at ovirt.org>, "arch" <arch at 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 at 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 at redhat.com
> > >>> Web: www.redhat.com
> > >>> RHT Global #: 82-62605
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Arch mailing list
> > >> Arch at ovirt.org
> > >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
> > >>
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Infra mailing list
> > > Infra at 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 at ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Infra mailing list
> Infra at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
>