To RHEL or Not to RHEL?

[Tim Flink]

On Wed, 13 May 2015 08:56:54 -0600
Tim Flink <tflink at redhat.com> wrote:

<snip>

> > > All of the virthosts (at least in each group of dev/stg/prod)
> > > would have a chunk of shared storage used to store the canonical
> > > VM images that we use to boot the disposable clients (the disk
> > > changes would be done locally to the virthosts). This way we only
> > > have to build them once instead of once per virthost.
> > 
> > Would it be feasable to just build them once and rsync them between
> > hosts? Or would you prefer shared storage?
> 
> Honestly, that hadn't even occurred to me. I think it may end up
> depending on how we kick off the image builds but that sounds much
> easier and more reliable than a shared filesystem.

When I was working on the disposable clients today, I rememberd another
reason that I was thinking "shared filesystem" and I figured that I'd
add it here.

One of the use cases that we're designing for is cloud image testing.
For this use case, the task would be given details about an image,
download that compose product and run some task on it. With a shared
filesystem, we could procure these images once and it would be
available across all the virthosts instead of downloading it once per
virthost that was assigned a task using a given compose product.

I'm still not sure that the shared filesystem would be worth the
trouble but there was another reason besides "I didn't think about it"
that we were thinking about going that route :)

Tim
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/qa-devel/attachments/20150514/268c76cc/attachment.sig>