Filing this RFE as part of the discussion at BZ 1534204 This is being filed as a docs bug but we will need input from various DFG (e.g. PIDONE, Compute, DF, Storage, Networking, ...?). The aim is to document best practices and things that an operator can set or confirm before starting an upgrade, though it would also apply to any stack update operation including the minor update and across all versions. Things like configuration of number of processes and threads for keystone for optimal performance, number of heat workers ( e.g. see discussion in https://access.redhat.com/support/cases/#/case/02002356?commentId=a0aA000000LMXDpIAP ). Other things like cluster state, ... and anything else other DFG might suggest.
*** Bug 1534204 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
We will track the DB section of this RFE in to main sub BZs: [Implementation] - DB purge prior to major version and Fast Forward Upgrade https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1542077 [Doc patch] - Guidance for db purge prior to major version and Fast Forward Upgrade https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535590
Currently working on this with Chris Fields: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ER2E75DFtydu4ZLKgnCt1nj24HVERKoeTbOe7DHP80c/edit#heading=h.3zzknn4911kh
Jon Thomas is also tracking these things on this spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/123QjuUDQyLXVfit_Mght2mgDV28pE5g4KS66pweEAvw/edit#gid=0
I worked with Chris and Jon to implement a set of validation procedures for both the undercloud and overcloud. For example, these have been imcluded in the OSP13 FFFWD Upgrade guide: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openstack_platform/13/html/fast_forward_upgrades/assembly-preparing_for_openstack-platform_upgrade#validating_an_openstack_platform_10_undercloud https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openstack_platform/13/html/fast_forward_upgrades/assembly-preparing_for_openstack-platform_upgrade#validating_an_openstack_platform_10_overcloud Marios, I think this issue has been resolved but want to check with you in case there's anything else we should add. What do you reckon?
Thanks Dan that all looks great. I cc ccamacho UA of DFG:Upgrades so they can also discuss (I've moved to upstream ci) ... I think the next step is to try and automate those into the tripleo-validations so we can get the operator to just run that rather than the individual bash snippets (though there will likely be folks that prefer the latter anyway :) ) but that needs to be discussed and prioritized/tracked by upgrades folks thanks
This appears to be resolved. Closing this BZ but feel free to reopen if further changes are required.