[Pulp-dev] Port Pulp3 to use RQ
Bryan Kearney
bkearney at redhat.com
Tue May 8 15:53:56 UTC 2018
ok.. so it is quiesce the old system and then normal updates?
-- bk
On 05/08/2018 07:27 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote:
> Here is a look at what the Pulp2 -> Pulp3 necessary things would be
> w.r.t this change. These could also be automated.
>
> 1. Empty the Pulp system of all of it's tasks and stop all Pulp services.
> 2. Uninstall RabbitMQ or Qpid if its only purpose was to serve the Pulp
> tasking system. (Satellite uses Qpid in other ways so it would likely
> keep it in the architecture for other purposes).
> 3. Uninstall Celery/kombu/billiard/py-amqp (the whole celery stack
> effectively)
> 4. upgrade the bits to Pulp3. This will also bring RQ with it automatically.
> 5. Install Redis as a new service in your infra
> 6. Replace the systemd files for the pulp_workers and
> pulp_resource_manager. This causes systemd to start RQ instead of Celery.
> 7. [optional] Configure Redis auth/ssl and configure Pulp's settings
> file to match if that is part of your environment.
>
> Questions/ideas/concerns are welcome.
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Bryan Kearney <bkearney at redhat.com
> <mailto:bkearney at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> what does this look like for upgrading from Pulp2 to Pulp3?
>
> -- bk
>
> On 05/08/2018 05:34 AM, David Davis wrote:
> > +1. Thank you @bmbouter and @dalley for working on this.
> >
> >
> > David
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com <mailto:dalley at redhat.com>
> > <mailto:dalley at redhat.com <mailto:dalley at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > I've finished my review and resolved all of the 'blocker' issues
> > that were uncovered during testing. Overall, I'm highly confident
> > that this is a better path forwards than the continued use of Celery
> > / Kombu. There are a couple of outstanding edge cases to be
> > resolved eventually, which I plan to file as issues post-merge, but
> > nothing serious or intractable.
> >
> > If there are no objections, I think it would be reasonable to merge
> > this code after this week's beta builds are published (after, in
> > order to avoid major changes during Summit / PyCon prep time).
> >
> > Thank you, Brian, for doing the planning and work needed to make
> > this happen. It was a lot of effort and is very highly appreciated.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:28 AM, Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com>
> > <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > Through several rebases, now all PRs are showing the RQ PRs on
> > Travis as passing with pulp-smash. Several points of feedback
> > have been addressed.
> >
> > If you're interested in commenting on these PRs or trying them
> > out, please do. I hope to merge after the other taking system
> > maintainers @dalley and @daviddavis have finished their
> > testing/review and barring any other calls for delay or blocking
> > concerns.
> >
> > If there are any questions, issues, or concerns, please reach
> > out, and we can talk through them.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Brian Bouterse
> > <bbouters at redhat.com <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com>
> <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > I put together a prototype and posted the PRs. I'm still
> > working to get Travis happy, but locally 100% of smash tests
> > using these branches. It's worked very reliably for me so
> > far. There are no gaps in the pulp feature set on top of RQ.
> >
> > I hope people test it out and give some feedback. See the
> > commit messages for details on what was done. Here are the PRs:
> >
> > https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3454
> <https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3454>
> > <https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3454
> <https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3454>>
> > https://github.com/pulp/pulp_file/pull/72
> <https://github.com/pulp/pulp_file/pull/72>
> > <https://github.com/pulp/pulp_file/pull/72
> <https://github.com/pulp/pulp_file/pull/72>>
> > https://github.com/pulp/devel/pull/146
> <https://github.com/pulp/devel/pull/146>
> > <https://github.com/pulp/devel/pull/146
> <https://github.com/pulp/devel/pull/146>>
> > https://github.com/PulpQE/pulp-smash/pull/960
> <https://github.com/PulpQE/pulp-smash/pull/960>
> > <https://github.com/PulpQE/pulp-smash/pull/960
> <https://github.com/PulpQE/pulp-smash/pull/960>>
> >
> > Feel free to send questions here or to the PR. Any feedback
> > is welcome.
> >
> > -Brian
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Milan Kovacik
> > <mkovacik at redhat.com <mailto:mkovacik at redhat.com>
> <mailto:mkovacik at redhat.com <mailto:mkovacik at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > +1 I like RQ and I like
> > http://python-rq.org/docs/testing/ <http://python-rq.org/docs/testing/>
> > <http://python-rq.org/docs/testing/
> <http://python-rq.org/docs/testing/>> esp.
> > there's Fakeredis ;)
> >
> >
> > --
> > milan
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 6:58 PM, Brian Bouterse
> > <bbouters at redhat.com <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com>
> <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com <mailto:bbouters at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> > > Thanks for all the discussion both on list and on irc.
> > After more
> > > investigation, it sounds like there are no feature
> > gaps, but we will need to
> > > incorporate this workaround to cancel a task that is
> > already running.
> > >
> > > The feedback I've heard on the idea is that it's
> > valuable and looks
> > > feasible, but we won't really know until we prototype
> > it a bit. Based on the
> > > technical outline in the previous email, I believe it
> > can be prototyped in a
> > > day or two. I plan to do this soon, once I contribute
> > to a few other
> > > required-for-beta planning items first. I'll post my
> > PR to see what other
> > > think of the change, probably next week.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 6:41 PM, Daniel Alley
> > <dalley at redhat.com <mailto:dalley at redhat.com>
> <mailto:dalley at redhat.com <mailto:dalley at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I meant in the sense that, what is the aftermath when
> > it comes back
> > >> online, and is it screwed up in ways that cause side
> > effects.
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 5:02 PM, Jeremy Audet
> > <jaudet at redhat.com <mailto:jaudet at redhat.com>
> <mailto:jaudet at redhat.com <mailto:jaudet at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > RQ does not support revoking tasks. If you send
> > the worker a SIGINT,
> > >>> > it will finish the task and then stop processing
> > new ones. If you send the
> > >>> > worker SIGKILL, it will stop immediately, but I
> > don't think it gracefully
> > >>> > handles this circumstance.
> > >>>
> > >>> Nothing handles SIGKILL gracefully. Processes can't
> > catch that signal.
> > >>> `kill -9 $pid` sends SIGKILL.
> > >>>
> > >>> If one is looking for a way to gracefully,
> > immediately kill an RQ
> > >>> worker, then SIGTERM may do the trick. Anecdotally,
> > many processes
> > >>> handle this signal in a hurried fashion.
> > Semantically, this is
> > >>> appropriate: SIGINT is the "terminal interrupt"
> > signal (Ctrl+c sends
> > >>> SIGINT), whereas SIGTERM is the "termination signal."
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Pulp-dev mailing list
> > > Pulp-dev at redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com>
> <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com>>
> > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
> > <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pulp-dev mailing list
> > Pulp-dev at redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com>
> <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com>>
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
> > <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pulp-dev mailing list
> > Pulp-dev at redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com>
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com>
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20180508/7245707f/attachment.sig>
More information about the Pulp-dev
mailing list