Re: [Openstack-operators] Case studies on Openstack HA architecture

[Van Leeuwen, Robert]

> Thanks Curtis, Robert, David and Mohammed for your responses. 
>As a follow up question, do you use any deployment automation tools for 
> setting up the HA control plane?
>  I can see the value of deploying each service in separate virtual 
> environment or containers but automating such deployment requires developing 
> some new tools. Openstack-ansible is one potential deployment tool that I am 
> aware of but that had limited support CentOS. 

Here we currently have a physical loadbalancer which provides the ALL the HA 
logic. 
The services are installed on vms managed by Puppet.
IMHO a loadbalancer is the right place to solve HA since you only have to do it 
once. 
(Depending on your Neutron implementation you might also need something for 
Neutron) 

To rant a bit about deployment/automation:
I am not necessarily a fan of management with puppet since module dependencies 
can become a nightmare even with things like R10K.
e.g. you want to deploy a newer version of keystone, this requires a newer 
openstack-common puppet module. 
Now you have a change that affects everything (other OpenStack puppet modules 
also use openstack-common) and might now need upgrades as well.

To solve these kind of things we are looking at containers and investigated two 
possible deployment scenario’s:
OpenStack helm (+containers build by kolla) which is pretty nice and uses k8s.
The problem is that it is still early days for both k8s and helm. 
Things that stuck out most:
* Helm: Nice for a deployment from scratch. 
   Integration with our environment is a bit of a pain (e.g. if you want to 
start with just one service)
   It would need a lot of work to above into the product and not everything 
would be easy to get into upstream.
   Still a very early implementation needs quite a bit of TLC. 
If you can live with what comes out of the box it might be a nice solution.
* K8S: It is a relatively complex product and it is still missing some features 
especially for self-hosted installations.

After some deliberation, we decided to go with the “hashi” stack (with kola 
build containers). 
This stack has more of a unix philosophy, simple processes that do 1 thing well:
* Nomad –scheduling 
* Consul - service discovery and KV store
* Vault – secret management
* Fabio zeroconf loadbalancer which integrates with Consul
In general this stack is really easy to understand for everyone. (just work 
with it half a day and you really understand what is going on under the hood)
There are no overlay networks :)
Lots of the stuff can break without much impact. E.g. Nomad is only relevant 
when you want to start/stop containers it can crash or turned off the rest of 
the time.
Another pro for this is that there is a significant amount of knowledge around 
these products in house.

To give an example on complexity: if you look at deployment of k8s itself and 
the hashi stack: 
* deployment of k8s with kargo: you have a very large playblook which takes 30 
minutes to run to setup a cluster.
* deployment of the hashi stuff: is just one binary for each component with 1 
config file basically done in a few minutes if even that.


Cheers,
Robert van Leeuwen

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Pike packages for openSUSE and SLES available

[Thomas Bechtold]

Hi,

Pike packages for openSUSE and SLES are now available at:

http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/Cloud:/OpenStack:/Pike/

We maintain + test the packages for SLES 12SP3 and openSUSE Leap 42.3.

If you find issues, please do not hesitate to report them to
opensuse-cloud at opensuse.org or to https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/

Thanks and have a lot of fun,

Tom

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] UC Working Groups and Teams - Definition Review

[Edgar Magana]

Hello All,

During today’s UC IRC meeting, we have agreed to review the status and 
definition of all Working Groups and Teams under the umbrella of the User 
Committee (UC).
As you know, the UC has defined two different types of entities (Working Groups 
and Teams) under the scope of the UC goals. We want to make sure that each one 
of these groups are properly defined under any of the before mentioned entities.
You can fine more details under the UC Charter:
https://governance.openstack.org/uc/

UC will be contacting all chairs directly to kick off the discussions and 
gather any needed requirements.

We all appreciate your support on this effort to consolidate our functions and 
be able to reach our goals.

Thank you in advanced,

OpenStack User Committee
Matt, Shamail, Melvin, Saverio and Edgar




___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Case studies on Openstack HA architecture

[Fox, Kevin M]

kolla has various containerization tools. one based on ansible, another based 
on kubernetes.

From: Imtiaz Chowdhury [imtiaz.chowdh...@workday.com]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 5:24 PM
To: Curtis
Cc: openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Case studies on Openstack HA architecture

Thanks Curtis, Robert, David and Mohammed for your responses.

As a follow up question, do you use any deployment automation tools for setting 
up the HA control plane? I can see the value of deploying each service in 
separate virtual environment or containers but automating such deployment 
requires developing some new tools. Openstack-ansible is one potential 
deployment tool that I am aware of but that had limited support CentOS.

Imtiaz

On 8/28/17, 2:23 PM, "Curtis"  wrote:

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Imtiaz Chowdhury
 wrote:
> Hi Openstack operators,
>
>
>
> Most Openstack HA deployment use 3 node database cluster, 3 node rabbitMQ
> cluster and 3 Controllers. I am wondering whether there are any studies 
done
> that show the pros and cons of co-locating database and messaging service
> with the Openstack control services.  In other words, I am very interested
> in learning about advantages and disadvantages, in terms of ease of
> deployment, upgrade and overall API performance, of having 3 all-in-one
> Openstack controller over a more distributed deployment model.

I'm not aware of any actual case studies, but this is the (current)
default model for tripleo and its downstream product, so there would
be a lot of deployments like this out there in the wild. In the
default deployment everything but compute is on these 3 nodes running
on the physical OS.

Do you mean 3 physical servers with everything running on the physical OS?

My opinion is that 3 physical nodes to run all the control plane
services is quite common, but in custom deployments I either run vms
and containers on those or just containers. I'd use at least lxc to
segregate services into their own containers.

I would also suggest that using those same physical servers as
north/south "network nodes" (which you probably don't have as I
believe workday is a big opencontrail user) or hosts for stateful
metric systems (ie. mongodb) can cause issues performance wise, but
co-located mysql/galera and rabbit on the same nodes as the rest of
the openstack control plane hasn't been a problem for me yet, but with
containers I could split them out fairly easily if needed.

Thanks,
Curtis.

>
>
>
> References to any work done in this area will be highly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Imtiaz
>
>
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Doperators&d=DwIBaQ&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=FzzkP-wZtxwR_lHv11gV2RDLNwSuEtI-Ttdh3mloOUA&m=byM_0ToLQ8JCji20rvyQJYr-Zm4pHsZ5TK4CFkuZbbk&s=mLtaaDedoNufBf-kCreLrdZ-McNRAuuesR3xWIT76Vc&e=
>



--
Blog: serverascode.com


___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Case studies on Openstack HA architecture

[Imtiaz Chowdhury]

Thanks Curtis, Robert, David and Mohammed for your responses. 

As a follow up question, do you use any deployment automation tools for setting 
up the HA control plane? I can see the value of deploying each service in 
separate virtual environment or containers but automating such deployment 
requires developing some new tools. Openstack-ansible is one potential 
deployment tool that I am aware of but that had limited support CentOS. 

Imtiaz

On 8/28/17, 2:23 PM, "Curtis"  wrote:

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Imtiaz Chowdhury
 wrote:
> Hi Openstack operators,
>
>
>
> Most Openstack HA deployment use 3 node database cluster, 3 node rabbitMQ
> cluster and 3 Controllers. I am wondering whether there are any studies 
done
> that show the pros and cons of co-locating database and messaging service
> with the Openstack control services.  In other words, I am very interested
> in learning about advantages and disadvantages, in terms of ease of
> deployment, upgrade and overall API performance, of having 3 all-in-one
> Openstack controller over a more distributed deployment model.

I'm not aware of any actual case studies, but this is the (current)
default model for tripleo and its downstream product, so there would
be a lot of deployments like this out there in the wild. In the
default deployment everything but compute is on these 3 nodes running
on the physical OS.

Do you mean 3 physical servers with everything running on the physical OS?

My opinion is that 3 physical nodes to run all the control plane
services is quite common, but in custom deployments I either run vms
and containers on those or just containers. I'd use at least lxc to
segregate services into their own containers.

I would also suggest that using those same physical servers as
north/south "network nodes" (which you probably don't have as I
believe workday is a big opencontrail user) or hosts for stateful
metric systems (ie. mongodb) can cause issues performance wise, but
co-located mysql/galera and rabbit on the same nodes as the rest of
the openstack control plane hasn't been a problem for me yet, but with
containers I could split them out fairly easily if needed.

Thanks,
Curtis.

>
>
>
> References to any work done in this area will be highly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Imtiaz
>
>
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Doperators&d=DwIBaQ&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=FzzkP-wZtxwR_lHv11gV2RDLNwSuEtI-Ttdh3mloOUA&m=byM_0ToLQ8JCji20rvyQJYr-Zm4pHsZ5TK4CFkuZbbk&s=mLtaaDedoNufBf-kCreLrdZ-McNRAuuesR3xWIT76Vc&e=
 
>



-- 
Blog: serverascode.com


___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Case studies on Openstack HA architecture

[Curtis]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Imtiaz Chowdhury
 wrote:
> Hi Openstack operators,
>
>
>
> Most Openstack HA deployment use 3 node database cluster, 3 node rabbitMQ
> cluster and 3 Controllers. I am wondering whether there are any studies done
> that show the pros and cons of co-locating database and messaging service
> with the Openstack control services.  In other words, I am very interested
> in learning about advantages and disadvantages, in terms of ease of
> deployment, upgrade and overall API performance, of having 3 all-in-one
> Openstack controller over a more distributed deployment model.

I'm not aware of any actual case studies, but this is the (current)
default model for tripleo and its downstream product, so there would
be a lot of deployments like this out there in the wild. In the
default deployment everything but compute is on these 3 nodes running
on the physical OS.

Do you mean 3 physical servers with everything running on the physical OS?

My opinion is that 3 physical nodes to run all the control plane
services is quite common, but in custom deployments I either run vms
and containers on those or just containers. I'd use at least lxc to
segregate services into their own containers.

I would also suggest that using those same physical servers as
north/south "network nodes" (which you probably don't have as I
believe workday is a big opencontrail user) or hosts for stateful
metric systems (ie. mongodb) can cause issues performance wise, but
co-located mysql/galera and rabbit on the same nodes as the rest of
the openstack control plane hasn't been a problem for me yet, but with
containers I could split them out fairly easily if needed.

Thanks,
Curtis.

>
>
>
> References to any work done in this area will be highly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Imtiaz
>
>
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
Blog: serverascode.com

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] User Committee Weekly IRC meeting reminder (8/28/2017)

[Edgar Magana]

Thank you for the reminder Shamail. I will be attending but potentially 
finishing some work. I will appreciate if you moderate today’s meeting.

Thanks,

Edgar

From: Shamail Tahir 
Date: Monday, August 28, 2017 at 8:34 AM
To: user-committee , openstack-operators 

Subject: [User-committee] User Committee Weekly IRC meeting reminder (8/28/2017)

Hi everyone,

The User Committee will be meeting later today. The agenda can be found on our 
wiki page and the meeting details are on eavesdrop.

[1] 
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
[2] 
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#User_Committee_Meeting

--
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] User Committee Weekly IRC meeting reminder (8/28/2017)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The User Committee will be meeting later today. The agenda can be found on
our wiki page and the meeting details are on eavesdrop.

[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
[2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#User_Committee_Meeting

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators