Re: [DOC] Review Request for Fedora Atomic
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:12 AM, Trishna Guha wrote: > Hi, > > As discussed in Fedora Cloud FAD 2016, We had decided to focus on > Documentation for Fedora Atomic working group. > > Our Documentation is live on [1]. This is the work done so far on > documentation. > We have some Pull requests opened [2] for the Documentation repository [3]. > > Kushal and I have been working on the Documentation. > It would be helpful if someone can review the PRs :-). > Also if someone has any idea that we are missing any Doc please feel free to > reply to the thread > or probably open issue here [4]? And Pull requests are most welcome ;-). This is great! Thank you for working on this. Were the pull requests requesting feedback ever looked at? -AdamM > > [1] http://fedoracloud.readthedocs.io > [2] https://github.com/fedora-cloud/fedoracloud/pulls > [3] https://github.com/fedora-cloud/fedoracloud > [4] https://github.com/fedora-cloud/fedoracloud/issues/new > > > Thanks, > Trishna > ___ > cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
meeting minutes
=== #fedora-meeting-1: fedora_atomic_wg === Meeting started by jberkus at 17:02:34 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2016-12-14/fedora_atomic_wg.2016-12-14-17.02.log.html . Meeting summary --- * Roll Call (jberkus, 17:02:55) * roshi is awesome, he helps out with cloud/atomic WG and will be back soon (dustymabe, 17:06:44) * FDLIBS (jberkus, 17:07:06) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Container:Review_Process (misc, 17:13:13) * Kubenetes in Fedora Atomic (jberkus, 17:26:45) * ACTION: add kubernetes packages back into the base OStree for FAH 25 (jberkus, 17:30:41) * ACTION: jberkus to create tickets for prerequisites for removing kube packages from base ostree (jberkus, 17:31:09) * ISO Images (jberkus, 17:32:50) * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/185 (jberkus, 17:33:05) * ACTION: dustymabe to follow-up on merge of UEFI patch into anaconda (jberkus, 17:37:03) * ACTION: dustymabe, walters to discuss new release process at beginning of calendar year 2017 (jberkus, 17:41:53) * other issues (jberkus, 17:42:23) * LINK: https://getfedora.org/en/atomic/download/ (jbrooks, 17:45:27) * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/180 (jberkus, 17:51:05) * open floor (jberkus, 17:53:25) * ACTION: dustymabe walters jberkus to explore overlayfs writeability issue (jberkus, 18:01:38) * ACTION: dustymabe to blog using overlayfs in Atomic (jberkus, 18:01:47) Meeting ended at 18:02:13 UTC. Action Items * add kubernetes packages back into the base OStree for FAH 25 * jberkus to create tickets for prerequisites for removing kube packages from base ostree * dustymabe to follow-up on merge of UEFI patch into anaconda * dustymabe, walters to discuss new release process at beginning of calendar year 2017 * dustymabe walters jberkus to explore overlayfs writeability issue * dustymabe to blog using overlayfs in Atomic Action Items, by person --- * dustymabe * dustymabe to follow-up on merge of UEFI patch into anaconda * dustymabe, walters to discuss new release process at beginning of calendar year 2017 * dustymabe walters jberkus to explore overlayfs writeability issue * dustymabe to blog using overlayfs in Atomic * jberkus * jberkus to create tickets for prerequisites for removing kube packages from base ostree * dustymabe walters jberkus to explore overlayfs writeability issue * walters * dustymabe, walters to discuss new release process at beginning of calendar year 2017 * dustymabe walters jberkus to explore overlayfs writeability issue * **UNASSIGNED** * add kubernetes packages back into the base OStree for FAH 25 People Present (lines said) --- * jberkus (111) * dustymabe (62) * maxamillion (35) * roshi (31) * zodbot (19) * walters (16) * jbrooks (14) * misc (11) * trishnag (6) * bowlofeggs (2) * tflink (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- -- Josh Berkus Project Atomic Red Hat OSAS ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default
On 12/14/2016 10:38 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > On 12/14/2016 07:51 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: >> I have heard that the issue with yum/rpm is being worked on in the kernel. >> For those that to not know the issue is for programs that open a file twice >> once for readonly and then later for read/write. In the first open the file >> is >> on the lower file system. When you open the second time for read/write, >> Overlay does a COPY/UP which creates a separate file. The program thinks >> that it has the same file opened twice, but it actually has two different >> files >> open. > That is great information. Is there an issue somewhere where we can > track the progress of the "fix"? > > Dusty Vivek do you have an answer to this? ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default
On 12/14/2016 07:51 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > > I have heard that the issue with yum/rpm is being worked on in the kernel. > For those that to not know the issue is for programs that open a file twice > once for readonly and then later for read/write. In the first open the file > is > on the lower file system. When you open the second time for read/write, > Overlay does a COPY/UP which creates a separate file. The program thinks > that it has the same file opened twice, but it actually has two different > files > open. That is great information. Is there an issue somewhere where we can track the progress of the "fix"? Dusty ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default
On 12/13/2016 02:18 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > On 12/13/2016 01:02 PM, Colin Walters wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016, at 12:45 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote: >>> Are the POSIX issues in applications running on overlay mostly resolved >>> now? I.e. if we flipped the default would be reasonably able to support a >>> diverse range of Linux workloads without the risk that previously existed? >> overlayfs will never be fully POSIX compatible, but I think that's OK, >> because remember - you shouldn't use overlayfs for persistent data, >> or really anything that's not code/config files (and we want to get >> to where that's overlayfs-type semantics for builds, and read-only >> for deployment). Data should be in Kube persistent volumes etc. >> >> I think the thing to focus on is tools that are run during builds - the >> yum-in-overlayfs bug is a good example, because the RPM database >> *is* a database which is the type of workload that's going to >> be sensitive to the overlayfs semantics. How many of those >> are there? Probably not many, I suspect most of the compat >> issues with userspace have been shaken out by now. >> >> (But long term we may end up in a situation where people >> who want to run e.g. rhel5's yum in a container need to >> somehow fall back to devmapper) >> > So if we were to propose the "overlayfs as default" change for all of > Fedora, would you consider that to be problematic considering your > "you shouldn't use overlayfs for persistent data," stance. In the case > of a user running pet containers on their local desktop environment, > what is the sentiment? > > Dusty > ___ > cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Yes I might hesitate to run PET Containers in Overlay. I hope to get to the point where you can run different container workloads on different backends. It might be better to run a PET Container on OSTree using runc and not going through the client server operation of docker. ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default
Yes I plan on writing a blog on this once we have an update to docker-storage-setup to handle setting up /var/lib/docker on a separate partition. https://github.com/projectatomic/docker-storage-setup/pull/175 Once we get this merged, we could easily move to overlayfs as default on atomic host, but still allow a user to switch from overlay back to devicemapper. On 12/13/2016 12:23 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:01 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: >> The only way to change from one storage to the other is to use >> >> atomic storage export >> change the config >> atomic storage reset >> atomic storage import > Nifty. > > A migration tool would have to juggle the potential for insufficient > space in /var for the export; or sufficient space for export but then > not importing. And then there's cleanup of otherwise dead space used > by device mapper. So possibly more than one fs resize is necessary. > I'd say probably leave things alone for upgrades, but documenting a > strategy for migrating to overlay is OK. > > ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
