Add Testdays app to infra-ansible
AbandonedPublic

Authored by jskladan on Jul 14 2015, 12:17 PM.

Details

Reviewers
tflink
mkrizek
Summary

Hopefully this is "it" for the Testdays playbook.

Test Plan

None - is there any reasonable way to test it?

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Unit Tests Skipped
jskladan retitled this revision from to Add Testdays app to infra-ansible.Jul 14 2015, 12:17 PM
jskladan updated this object.
jskladan edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
jskladan added reviewers: tflink, mkrizek.
jskladan added a project: infrastructure.

@jskladan and I talked about this a bit over IRC but figured it would be good to continue the conversation in the review.

My main concern here is where the app will be hosted - as a qa app (more like taskotron) or an infra app. I think this depends on a few things:

  1. the desired hostname (testdays.fp.o vs. testdays.qa.fp.o)
  2. run-ability on el7

The more I think about it, I think it should be hosted like other infra apps (and blockerbugs) instead of being hosted like taskotron. The only reason I can think of that could prevent it being hosted that was was if resultsdb didn't work on el7.

However, for the short/medium term, we need to do something about the old f19 cloud instance that's hanging around. I'll look into making this into testdays.fedorainfracloud.org until we find a more permanent resting place for the app.

As a side question that I genuinely don't know the answer to - how many groups used testdays.fp.o for test days during f22?

I'm starting to think that this may be a better candidate for a fedorainfracloud.org instance so that we don't have to deal with the centos/infra bits right now. AFAIK, testdays is pretty much the only thing keeping the old cloud from being decomissioned.

I still want to see it in ansible and we need to have more than 1 person with access to the machine but I'm thinking that would be easier for now - any other thoughts?

I don't have any preference either way - I think we long since established that I'm not really the sysadmin :D
If deploying it in fedorainfracloud is feasible, then let's do it. Or I can deploy it in openstack, and we can just set the DNS properly to point in the right direction.

In D441#9005, @jskladan wrote:

I don't have any preference either way - I think we long since established that I'm not really the sysadmin :D

Even though you're the one of the two of us with a sysadmin certificate? :-D

If deploying it in fedorainfracloud is feasible, then let's do it. Or I can deploy it in openstack, and we can just set the DNS properly to point in the right direction.

It's easier and will be faster - there are a bunch of tickets that I'd have to file in order to deploy testdays as described in these ansible snippets.

tflink requested changes to this revision.Jul 30 2015, 3:20 PM

If we're changing to a cloud host, some changes are needed. These are the first ones that I see

inventory/group_vars/testdays
14

I'm not sure what the defaults for ks_repo and ks_url are off the top of my head but it's better to be specific with them so that we get a known result

22

Since this'll be self-hosted, it should be {{ inventory_hostname }}

28

same as above, this should be {{inventory_hostname }}

33

testdays.fedorainfracloud.org

36

this can be changed to be more specific, no? Either way, the range will need to change if we're moving this to the new cloud instance

inventory/host_vars/db-qa01.qa.fedoraproject.org
30

if the db is self-hosted, these don't need to be backed up from db-qa01

inventory/inventory
512

this should change to testdays.fedorainfracloud.org

playbooks/groups/testdays.yml
63

This'll need postgresql_server as well

playbooks/include/proxies-reverseproxy.yml
332

All the changes in this file aren't needed for cloud stuff

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Jul 30 2015, 3:20 PM

I've added this to the infra ansible repo and have deployed testdays.fedorainfracloud.org - this review is no longer needed.

jskladan abandoned this revision.Sep 15 2015, 8:20 AM