akosiaris added a comment.

  In T273097#6801429 <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T273097#6801429>, 
@RKemper wrote:
  
  > @akosiaris Is your concern with the idea of using a`flink` base image 
solution mainly just centered around the inefficiency/inconvenience of needing 
SRE to merge any flink version upgrades?
  
  I wouldn't call it merely an inconvenience. I would call it a source of 
potential friction between teams, see below for an elaboration.
  
  > Since we have an embedded SRE on search (me) and to a lesser extent 
Guillaume, I think it wouldn't be too much of a problem.
  
  So, say a bus factor of 1.5 or so? Not ideal, but workable. That being said, 
it all depends on the urgency, see below.
  
  > In general having our dependencies managed by a docker image will make it 
easier for us to be explicit about what version we're using, and it seems like 
the default docker-y way of doing things. Is there a technical reason why a 
base image might not be a good idea?
  
  Unfortunately, even being explicit on the level of docker images won't make 
it easer. And the reason for that is the source of the content (the flink 
tar.gz file)  will still not be under Search's control (correct me if I am 
wrong, I might have misunderstood something) but instead on the flink project's 
servers. What this will mean is that the creation of the base image will 
succeed only for a short period of time after bumping the version of flink, 
since the flink project, per my undestanding, removes old versions from their 
servers.
  
  However that is not the only time we build images. We  semi-regularly have to 
rebuild the entire tree of docker images for some reason, the most usual ones 
being security updates in the base images, some misconfiguration or some newer 
features being added to our image building toolkit. What that means is that on 
the next shellshock/heartbleed/younameit the rebuild breaks. Then, SRE comes 
knocking on Search's door,  asking for a bump the version of flink in that 
container cause we need to rebuild it. Now, you will obviously point out that 
Search will probably be relying on some version of the container they can still 
rely on the old one and upgrade on their own timeline. However, during that 
timeframe before the upgrade happens is:
  
  - SRE has an unbuildable image which it does not control and knows little 
about. So it does what comes naturally, which is complain.
  - Search is running an image that does not have the security upgrades.
  - SRE is pushing for having images without known security vulnerabilities.
  - Search is forced to alter plans and reprioritize upgrading the flink 
version cause SRE is complaining.
  
  So, a source of friction  between teams.
  
  All of this can be solved by just moving the source of the problem (the flink 
.tar.gz) somewhere that Search controls so they can guarantee that a) it's the 
version Search wants b) fetching it during the building phase will not fail. 
But if that happens, most of this discussion becomes moot and the layer that 
docker image would be is just a potential (depending on whether the layer is 
present or not on the build host) speedup during building (which we can do, but 
for the right reasons).
  
  Interestingly, the debian package approach discussed in T266495 
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T266495> does have the 2 attributes outlined 
above which is why it's preferable to me. It still relies on an SRE of course 
to upgrade it which is a minus, but it shares this minus with this proposal. 
Ideally we wouldn't even need that and any member of Search would be able to 
update it.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T273097

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: akosiaris
Cc: RKemper, dcausse, Aklapper, Gehel, akosiaris, Mstyles, MPhamWMF, CBogen, 
Akuckartz, Nandana, Namenlos314, Lahi, Gq86, Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, 
GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, EBjune, merbst, LawExplorer, _jensen, rosalieper, 
Scott_WUaS, Jonas, Xmlizer, jkroll, Wikidata-bugs, Jdouglas, aude, Tobias1984, 
Manybubbles, Mbch331
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-bugs mailing list
Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs

Reply via email to