Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 866889
PRD32 - vdsm-bootstrap rewrite
Last modified: 2016-02-10 14:10:00 EST
CURRENT ISSUES (nut shell)
* Too many bootstrap sequences (standard, node, registration).
* Too much complexity, can break at a lot of places, hard to adapt new features.
* No pluggable (cluster).
* vdsm-bootstrap part of vdsm package, however it is back-end tool, hard to maintain the dependency and support multiple back-end versions.
* No manual invocation method.
* Logging is insufficient, example: stderr data absent from logs on host, but appear on back-end side.
* SSH timeout issues.
* vdsm-bootstrap as standalone package.
* Lower cost of maintenance.
* Lower cost of integration.
* Flexible pluggable design.
* Two sequences
* ovirt-node upgrade
* ovirt-node registration has no ovirt logic, just “I'm here” notification.
* Establish a bidirectional channel between back-end and host, no iterative commands nor file transfers.
* Manual invocation support.
* Better timeout management.
* Better logging.
vdsm dependency: http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/8700/
vdsm dependency: http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/8725/
The million dollar question from a documentation point of view is what if any impact does this have on the *user* other than making it easier for us to support them?
- Does this change the registration flow for RHEV-H hosts?
- Does this change the registration flow for RHEL hosts?
- Does this change how/where users should find logs?
- Is there a feature page for this work?
(In reply to comment #3)
> Hi Alon,
> The million dollar question from a documentation point of view is what if
> any impact does this have on the *user* other than making it easier for us
> to support them?
> In particular:
> - Does this change the registration flow for RHEV-H hosts?
> - Does this change the registration flow for RHEL hosts?
There is no registration... only deployment... and no.
> - Does this change how/where users should find logs?
Host side (change)
/tmp/vdsm-bootstrap-*.log -> /tmp/ovirt-host-deploy-*.log
Engine side (new)
> - Is there a feature page for this work?
Ok, I captured the logging change under the clone(s) of Bug # 886709 and I can see that the fact that nodes/hosts can now be registered without HTTPS is covered under Bug # 723206 which is also in our list to review in documentation scoping.
As such I am going to set this particular bug to docs_scoped- as I don't think any additional documentation changes are required under it specifically.
This bug is currently attached to errata RHEA-2013:14491. If this change is not to be documented in the text for this errata please either remove it from the errata, set the requires_doc_text flag to minus (-), or leave a "Doc Text" value of "--no tech note required" if you do not have permission to alter the flag.
Otherwise to aid in the development of relevant and accurate release documentation, please fill out the "Doc Text" field above with these four (4) pieces of information:
* Cause: What actions or circumstances cause this bug to present.
* Consequence: What happens when the bug presents.
* Fix: What was done to fix the bug.
* Result: What now happens when the actions or circumstances above occur. (NB: this is not the same as 'the bug doesn't present anymore')
Once filled out, please set the "Doc Type" field to the appropriate value for the type of change made and submit your edits to the bug.
For further details on the Cause, Consequence, Fix, Result format please refer to:
Thanks in advance.
No doc required.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.
For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.
If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.