To RHEL or Not to RHEL?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, 9 May 2015 12:05:04 -0600
Tim Flink <tflink at redhat.com> wrote:

> This was brought up a little while ago and we decided to put off the
> discussion a little bit but I'd like to re-start the conversation
> before we get too much farther with disposable clients.
> 
> My plan for how our hosts would be set up once we deploy support for
> disposable clients is this:
>   - virthosts would have N buildslave processes running on them
>   - each buildslave would launch VMs for disposable clients as needed
>   - each virthost would have access to a shared filesystem used to
>     store at least VM images, maybe logs and other data

Thats each virthost, not all virthosts having the same storage right?

...snip good description of pros and cons...

> I think that infra would like to see us migrate to RHEL so that the
> Taskotron systems are more like everything else that supports Fedora
> but I don't think that they'd object to us running Fedora as long as
> we accept responsibility for keeping everything working and actually
> do it. If we do decide that we'd prefer to keep Fedora, we'll discuss
> it with them but I wanted to start the discussion here before
> bothering the infra folks with it.

Yeah, we run Fedora in places it makes sense to do so (builders are all
fedora for example), but they are some more work. 
 
> I suspect that our virthosts for Taskotron will be slightly different
> from infra's either way - we still need to figure out a shared
> filesystem for the images (gluster is the first thing that comes to
> mind but there are other options) and none of infra's virthosts have
> that. They do use gluster for a few things, so I suspect that it'd be
> less work to set that up on rhel than fedora.

gluster might be actually easier on fedora. RHEL ships all gluster but
the server in base repos, but the server is in some storage channel,
etc. 

I'm happy to provide any info or support needed. 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/qa-devel/attachments/20150511/265872d7/attachment.sig>