Re: Why you might want packages not containers for Ceph deployments

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 6/2/21 2:28 PM, Phil Regnauld wrote:
> Dave Hall (kdhall) writes:
>> But the developers aren't out in the field with their deployments
>> when something weird impacts a cluster and the standard approaches don't
>> resolve it.  And let's face it:  Ceph is a marvelously robust solution for
>> large scale storage, but it is also an amazingly intricate matrix of
>> layered interdependent processes, and you haven't got all of the bugs
>> worked out yet.
> 	I think you hit a very important point here: the concern with
> 	containerized deployments is that they may be a barrier to 
> 	efficient troubleshooting and bug reporting by traditional methods
> 	(strace et al) -- unless a well documented debugging and analysis
> 	toolset/methodolgy is provided.
>
> 	Paradoxically, containerized deployments certainly sound like they'd
> 	free up lots of cycles from the developer side of things (no more
> 	building packages for N distributions as was pointed out, easier
> 	upgrade and regression testing), but it might make it more difficult
> 	initially for the community to contribute (well, at least for us
> 	dinosaurs that aren't born with docker brains).
>
> 	Cheers,
> 	Phil


I think there's great value in ceph devs doing QA and testing docker
images, releasing them as a 'known good thing'.  Why? Doing that avoids
dependency hell inducing fragility-- fragility which I've experienced in
other multi-host / multi-master packages.  Wherein one distro's
maintainer decides some new rev ought be pushed out as 'security update'
while another distro's maintainer decides it's a feature change, another
calls it a backport, etc.  There's no way to QA 'upgrades' across so
many grains of shifting sand.

While the devs and the rest of the bleeding-edge folks should enjoy the
benefits that come with tolerating and managing dependency hell, having
the orchestrator upgrade in a known good sequence from a known base to a
known release reduces fragility.

Thanks for ceph!

Harry


_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux