On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Dan van der Ster <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 4:38 PM Alfredo Deza <adeza@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> After the 12.2.6 release went out, we've been thinking on better ways >> to remove a version from our repositories to prevent users from >> upgrading/installing a known bad release. >> >> The way our repos are structured today means every single version of >> the release is included in the repository. That is, for Luminous, >> every 12.x.x version of the binaries is in the same repo. This is true >> for both RPM and DEB repositories. >> >> However, the DEB repos don't allow pinning to a given version because >> our tooling (namely reprepro) doesn't construct the repositories in a >> way that this is allowed. For RPM repos this is fine, and version >> pinning works. >> >> To remove a bad version we have to proposals (and would like to hear >> ideas on other possibilities), one that would involve symlinks and the >> other one which purges the known bad version from our repos. > > What we did with our mirror was: `rm -f *12.2.6*; createrepo --update > .` Took a few seconds. Then disabled the mirror cron. Up until next time when we cut another release and you have to re-enable the mirror with 12.2.6 in it :( This is also fast for RPM repos, but not quite fast for DEB repos. Finally, *if* you are doing this, the metadata changes, and the repos need to be signed again. I am curious how that --update operation didn't make installations complain > > -- Dan > >> >> *Symlinking* >> When releasing we would have a "previous" and "latest" symlink that >> would get updated as versions move forward. It would require >> separation of versions at the URL level (all versions would no longer >> be available in one repo). >> >> The URL structure would then look like: >> >> debian/luminous/12.2.3/ >> debian/luminous/previous/ (points to 12.2.5) >> debian/luminous/latest/ (points to 12.2.7) >> >> Caveats: the url structure would change from debian-luminous/ to >> prevent breakage, and the versions would be split. For RPMs it would >> mean a regression if someone is used to pinning, for example pinning >> to 12.2.2 wouldn't be possible using the same url. >> >> Pros: Faster release times, less need to move packages around, and >> easier to remove a bad version >> >> >> *Single version removal* >> Our tooling would need to go and remove the known bad version from the >> repository, which would require to rebuild the repository again, so >> that the metadata is updated with the difference in the binaries. >> >> Caveats: time intensive process, almost like cutting a new release >> which takes about a day (and sometimes longer). Error prone since the >> process wouldn't be the same (one off, just when a version needs to be >> removed) >> >> Pros: all urls for download.ceph.com and its structure are kept the same. >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |