On 15 March 2016 at 17:19, Niels de Vos <nde...@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 07:21:40AM -0400, Jeff Darcy wrote:
> > > If it is in CentOS CI, then why do we need vagrant? I'm not sure how
> vagrant
> > > would make things more simple.
> > >
> > > We can use duffy to provision the machines, we can use gdeploy to
> install
> > > glusterfs and use distaf to run the tests. In the nightly job I
> created, it
> > > is using the same (minus the gdeploy, they don't have gdeploy in pypi
> yet).
> >
> > It might not be all about simplicity.  What about the time and resource
> > usage for provisioning in duffy vs. vagrant?
>
> Duffy has a pool of pre-installed machines for different CentOS versions
> and architectures. Requesting a few machines from Duffy is normally
> instant. I guess it takes more time to download (or build?) the Vagrant
> box.
>

Yes, Right now we get the machine from duffy instantly. If it is not
instant, it means no machines are in ready state and we will have to wait
few more minutes (~5 minutes) to get them.

But I think vagrant is very useful anywhere else (in non CentOS CI infra).
But I wasn't sure *in* CentOS CI, since the machines required for distaf
are available via duffy. So I wasn't sure where vagrant would fit in.

But if the plan is to run the existing regression tests by spawning vms
inside the machines provided by duffy, then I think it can be done.
Although someone will have to try that out see if it provides any advantage.

Best Regards,
Vishwanath



Niels
>
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Reply via email to