On 15 March 2016 at 17:19, Niels de Vos <ndevos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Duffy has a pool of pre-installed machines for different CentOS versionsOn Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 07:21:40AM -0400, Jeff Darcy wrote:
> > If it is in CentOS CI, then why do we need vagrant? I'm not sure how vagrant
> > would make things more simple.
> >
> > We can use duffy to provision the machines, we can use gdeploy to install
> > glusterfs and use distaf to run the tests. In the nightly job I created, it
> > is using the same (minus the gdeploy, they don't have gdeploy in pypi yet).
>
> It might not be all about simplicity. What about the time and resource
> usage for provisioning in duffy vs. vagrant?
and architectures. Requesting a few machines from Duffy is normally
instant. I guess it takes more time to download (or build?) the Vagrant
box.
Yes, Right now we get the machine from duffy instantly. If it is not instant, it means no machines are in ready state and we will have to wait few more minutes (~5 minutes) to get them.
But I think vagrant is very useful anywhere else (in non CentOS CI infra). But I wasn't sure *in* CentOS CI, since the machines required for distaf are available via duffy. So I wasn't sure where vagrant would fit in.
But if the plan is to run the existing regression tests by spawning vms inside the machines provided by duffy, then I think it can be done. Although someone will have to try that out see if it provides any advantage.
Best Regards,
Vishwanath
Niels
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
