Ci lvms storage no zuul #1759
Ci lvms storage no zuul #1759
Conversation
The ci_lvms_storage role aims to be a drop in replacement
for ci_local_storage. It uses LVMS (Logical Volume Manager
Storage) based on the TopoLVM CSI driver to dynamically
provision local storage built from block devices on OCP
nodes.
This role requires cifmw_lvms_disk_list to contain a list of
paths to block devices which already exist on OCP nodes. If
the cifmw_devscripts_config_overrides.vm_extradisks_list list
contains "vda vdb", then it will create these block devices and
cifmw_lvms_disk_list should be set to ['/dev/vda', '/dev/vdb'].
This role will then pass this list to the deviceSelector list
used by the LVMCluster CRD.
This patch introduces the role but ci_local_storage is still
used by the 06-deploy-{architecture,edpm}.yml playbooks unless
cifmw_use_lvms is true. The ci_gen_kustomize_values role is
updated to set the storageClass to lvms-local-storage only if
cifmw_use_lvms is true. Otherwise it keeps its default of
local-storage. A similar change has been made to the role
test_operator so that Tempest uses the chosen storage class.
In a follow up patch we can default cifmw_use_lvms to true so
LVMS becomes opt out. For now it is opt in for early testing.
Signed-off-by: John Fulton <[email protected]>
Related: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSPRH-2749
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Thanks for the PR! ❤️ |
fultonj
requested review from
rlandy
and removed request for
afazekas and
psathyan
We need to drop zuul.d changes from ci-framework change in order to test downstream. Known issue with downstream.
fultonj
force-pushed
the
ci_lvms_storage_no_zuul
branch
from
541bde6 to
189df0b
Compare
|
Build failed (check pipeline). Post https://review.rdoproject.org/zuul/buildset/5f59cb9e303c4f91a8d0a6e0bc0985f4 ✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 3h 24m 25s |
|
PR needs rebase. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
|
This was only made to test PR 1707 which has since merged. |
DNM - Test ci_lvms_storage PR 1707
We need to drop zuul.d changes from ci-framework change in order to test downstream. Known issue with downstream.
As a pull request owner and reviewers, I checked that: