Hi,
At the moment it is still not clear to me the upgrade process from V1 to V2.
The migration script https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289595/ has yet to be
approved. Does this support all drivers or is this just the default reference
implementation driver?
Are there people still using V1?
Thanks
Gary
On 8/25/16, 4:25 AM, "Doug Wiegley" <doug...@parksidesoftware.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Doug Wiegley <doug...@parksidesoftware.com>
wrote:
>
> Migration script has been submitted, v1 is not going anywhere from
stable/liberty or stable/mitaka, so it’s about to disappear from master.
>
> I’m thinking in this order:
>
> - remove jenkins jobs
> - wait for heat to remove their jenkins jobs ([heat] added to this
thread, so they see this coming before the job breaks)
> - remove q-lbaas from devstack, and any references to lbaas v1 in
devstack-gate or infra defaults.
> - remove v1 code from neutron-lbaas
FYI, all of the above have completed, and the final removal is in the merge
queue: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286381/
Mitaka will be the last stable branch with lbaas v1.
Thanks,
doug
>
> Since newton is now open for commits, this process is going to get
started.
>
> Thanks,
> doug
>
>
>
>> On Mar 8, 2016, at 11:36 AM, Eichberger, German
<german.eichber...@hpe.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, it’s Database only — though we changed the agent driver in the DB
from V1 to V2 — so if you bring up a V2 with that database it should reschedule
all your load balancers on the V2 agent driver.
>>
>> German
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/8/16, 3:13 AM, "Samuel Bercovici" <samu...@radware.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So this looks like only a database migration, right?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Eichberger, German [mailto:german.eichber...@hpe.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 12:28 AM
>>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>
>>> Ok, for what it’s worth we have contributed our migration script:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289595/ — please look at this as a starting
point and feel free to fix potential problems…
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> German
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/7/16, 11:00 AM, "Samuel Bercovici" <samu...@radware.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As far as I recall, you can specify the VIP in creating the LB so you
will end up with same IPs.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Eichberger, German [mailto:german.eichber...@hpe.com]
>>>> Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 8:30 PM
>>>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>>
>>>> Hi Sam,
>>>>
>>>> So if you have some 3rd party hardware you only need to change the
>>>> database (your steps 1-5) since the 3rd party hardware will just keep
>>>> load balancing…
>>>>
>>>> Now for Kevin’s case with the namespace driver:
>>>> You would need a 6th step to reschedule the loadbalancers with the V2
namespace driver — which can be done.
>>>>
>>>> If we want to migrate to Octavia or (from one LB provider to another)
it might be better to use the following steps:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Download LBaaS v1 information (Tenants, Flavors, VIPs, Pools,
Health
>>>> Monitors , Members) into some JSON format file(s) 2. Delete LBaaS v1
3.
>>>> Uninstall LBaaS v1 4. Install LBaaS v2 5. Transform the JSON format
>>>> file into some scripts which recreate the load balancers with your
>>>> provider of choice —
>>>>
>>>> 6. Run those scripts
>>>>
>>>> The problem I see is that we will probably end up with different VIPs
>>>> so the end user would need to change their IPs…
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> German
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/6/16, 5:35 AM, "Samuel Bercovici" <samu...@radware.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As for a migration tool.
>>>>> Due to model changes and deployment changes between LBaaS v1 and
LBaaS v2, I am in favor for the following process:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Download LBaaS v1 information (Tenants, Flavors, VIPs, Pools,
>>>>> Health Monitors , Members) into some JSON format file(s) 2. Delete
LBaaS v1 3.
>>>>> Uninstall LBaaS v1 4. Install LBaaS v2 5. Import the data from 1 back
>>>>> over LBaaS v2 (need to allow moving from falvor1-->flavor2, need to
>>>>> make room to some custom modification for mapping between v1 and v2
>>>>> models)
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Sam.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Fox, Kevin M [mailto:kevin....@pnnl.gov]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 2:06 AM
>>>>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok. Thanks for the info.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kevin
>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>> From: Brandon Logan [brandon.lo...@rackspace.com]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 2:42 PM
>>>>> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>>>
>>>>> Just for clarity, V2 did not reuse tables, all the tables it uses are
only for it. The main problem is that v1 and v2 both have a pools resource,
but v1 and v2's pool resource have different attributes. With the way neutron
wsgi works, if both v1 and v2 are enabled, it will combine both sets of
attributes into the same validation schema.
>>>>>
>>>>> The other problem with v1 and v2 running together was only occurring
when the v1 agent driver and v2 agent driver were both in use at the same time.
This may actually have been fixed with some agent updates in neutron, since
that is common code. It needs to be tested out though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Brandon
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 2016-03-03 at 22:14 +0000, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
>>>>>> Just because you had thought no one was using it outside of a PoC
doesn't mean folks aren''t using it in production.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We would be happy to migrate to Octavia. We were planning on doing
just that by running both v1 with haproxy namespace, and v2 with Octavia and
then pick off upgrading lb's one at a time, but the reuse of the v1 tables
really was an unfortunate decision that blocked that activity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're still trying to figure out a path forward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have an outage window next month. after that, it could be about 6
>>>>>> months before we could try a migration due to production load
>>>>>> picking up for a while. I may just have to burn out all the lb's
>>>>>> switch to v2, then rebuild them by hand in a marathon outage :/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And then there's this thingy that also critically needs fixing:
>>>>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1457556
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>>> From: Eichberger, German [german.eichber...@hpe.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 12:47 PM
>>>>>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kevin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we are offering a migration tool it would be namespace ->
>>>>>> namespace (or maybe Octavia since [1]) - given the limitations
>>>>>> nobody should be using the namespace driver outside a PoC so I am a
>>>>>> bit confused why customers can't self migrate. With 3rd party Lbs I
>>>>>> would assume vendors proving those scripts to make sure their
>>>>>> particular hardware works with those. If you indeed need a migration
>>>>>> from LBaaS
>>>>>> V1 namespace -> LBaaS V2 namespace/Octavia please file an RfE with
>>>>>> your use case so we can discuss it further...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> German
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286380
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Fox, Kevin M" <kevin....@pnnl.gov<mailto:kevin....@pnnl.gov>>
>>>>>> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>>> questions)"
>>>>>> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openst
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> c
>>>>>> k.org>>
>>>>>> Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 5:17 PM
>>>>>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>>>>>> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openst
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> c
>>>>>> k.org>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> no removal without an upgrade path. I've got v1 LB's and there still
isn't a migration script to go from v1 to v2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Stephen Balukoff
>>>>>> [sbaluk...@bluebox.net<mailto:sbaluk...@bluebox.net>]
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 4:49 PM
>>>>>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am also on-board with removing LBaaS v1 as early as possible in
the Newton cycle.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Samuel Bercovici
<samu...@radware.com<mailto:samu...@radware.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you all for your response.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my opinion given that UI/HEAT will make Mitaka and will have one
cycle to mature, it makes sense to remove LBaaS v1 in Newton.
>>>>>> Do we want do discuss an upgrade process in the summit?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Sam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Bryan Jones
>>>>>> [mailto:jone...@us.ibm.com<mailto:jone...@us.ibm.com>]
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 5:54 PM
>>>>>> To:
>>>>>> openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.opensta
>>>>>> c
>>>>>> k
>>>>>> .org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
weready?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And as for the Heat support, the resources have made Mitaka, with
additional functional tests on the way soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> blueprint:
>>>>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/lbaasv2-suport
>>>>>> gerrit topic:
>>>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/lbaasv2-suport
>>>>>> BRYAN M. JONES
>>>>>> Software Engineer - OpenStack Development
>>>>>> Phone: 1-507-253-2620<tel:1-507-253-2620>
>>>>>> E-mail: jone...@us.ibm.com<mailto:jone...@us.ibm.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original message -----
>>>>>> From: Justin Pomeroy
>>>>>> <jpom...@linux.vnet.ibm.com<mailto:jpom...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
>>>>>> To:
>>>>>> openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.opensta
>>>>>> c
>>>>>> k
>>>>>> .org>
>>>>>> Cc:
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Removing LBaaS v1 - are
we ready?
>>>>>> Date: Wed, Mar 2, 2016 9:36 AM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As for the horizon support, much of it will make Mitaka. See the
blueprint and gerrit topic:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-lbaas-v2-ui
>>>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/horizon-lbaas-v2-ui,n,z
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Justin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/2/16 9:22 AM, Doug Wiegley wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A few things:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - It's not proposed for removal in Mitaka. That patch is for Newton.
>>>>>> - HEAT and Horizon are planned for Mitaka (see
>>>>>> neutron-lbaas-dashboard for the latter.)
>>>>>> - I don't view this as a "keep or delete" question. If sufficient
>>>>>> folks are interested in maintaining it, there is a third option,
>>>>>> which is that the code can be maintained in a separate repo, by a
>>>>>> separate team (with or without the current core team's blessing.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No decisions have been made yet, but we are on the cusp of some
major maintenance changes, and two deprecation cycles have passed. Which path
forward is being discussed at today's Octavia meeting, or feedback is of course
welcomed here, in IRC, or anywhere.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> doug
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2016, at 7:06 AM, Samuel Bercovici
<samu...@radware.com<mailto:samu...@radware.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just notices the following change:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286381 which aims to remove LBaaS v1.
>>>>>> Is this planned for Mitaka or for Newton?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While LBaaS v2 is becoming the default, I think that we should have
the following before we replace LBaaS v1:
>>>>>> 1. Horizon Support - was not able to find any real activity on
it
>>>>>> 2. HEAT Support - will it be ready in Mitaka?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have any other items that are needed before we get rid of
LBaaS v1?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Sam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> _ _ ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>>> questions)
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev-reque
>>>>>> s t @lists.openstack.org>?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> _ _ ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>>> questions)
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<mailto:
>>>>>> O penstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> _ _ ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>>> questions)
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<mailto:
>>>>>> O penstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> _ _ ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>>> questions)
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http:/
>>>>>> / O penstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Stephen Balukoff
>>>>>> Principal Technologist
>>>>>> Blue Box, An IBM Company
>>>>>>
www.blueboxcloud.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.blueboxcloud.com&d=CwIGaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=VlZxHpZBmzzkWT5jqz9JYBk8YTeq9N3-diTlNj4GyNc&m=vJLP-7XciuDVakdowfZ0u_NPJGht_-SRMTpAZlP_9bg&s=J7W2p5eCYWf19MBaPHm_M8vmzWoiQ-xvl2KyjA5n8zw&e=
>
>>>>>> sbaluk...@blueboxcloud.com<mailto:sbaluk...@blueboxcloud.com>
>>>>>> 206-607-0660 x807
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> _ _ ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>>> questions)
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> _ _ ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>>> questions)
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>>>> _ ___ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>>>> _ ___ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>>>> _ ___ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> ___ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> ___ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
__________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
__________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
__________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
