[Pulp-list] Using Pulp in a server-only configuration?

[Andrea Giardini]

@Josh
How many machine do you update with this method? I use mco as well it's 
not always efficient with high number of machine (expecially if they 
have high load)
How do you deal with rpmdb corruption/ stuck transactions and all the 
other errors that can prevent a machine from updating correctly?

Cheers
Andrea
On 01/25/2015 06:29 PM, Baird, Josh wrote:
>
> We also use Pulp in this exact way.  Puppet drops down repo 
> definitions to each host which are associated with the host's Puppet 
> environment (dev, qa, prod).  The repo definitions point to "snapshot" 
> repositories in Pulp.  We promote packages up through the environments 
> as you are describing.
>
> We do not use the pulp-consumer client.   Instead we trigger "yum 
> updates" using mCollective on groups of hosts.
>
> Josh
>
> *From:*pulp-list-bounces at redhat.com 
> [mailto:pulp-list-bounces at redhat.com] *On Behalf Of *Trey Dockendorf
> *Sent:* Sunday, January 25, 2015 12:22 PM
> *To:* Mathew Crane
> *Cc:* pulp-list at redhat.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Pulp-list] Using Pulp in a server-only configuration?
>
> Your use case matches exactly how we use Pulp to manage repo contents 
> for a HPC cluster where a consumer service is not possible.  I've had 
> no issues and just push out repo files for all pulp managed repos 
> using Puppet.  Since I'm using self signed certs still in Pulp and our 
> network is private I made sure to serve all repos via http.
>
> - Trey
>
> On Jan 21, 2015 3:06 PM, "Mathew Crane" <mathew.crane at gmail.com 
> <mailto:mathew.crane at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> In my environment, it doesn't really make sense to have a single point 
> propagating changes to numerous hosts. Instead we'd opt to have the 
> consumers pull down from the Pulp server manually. I understand that 
> this hides a portion of Pulp's featureset (consumer management and 
> reporting) but what I'm more interested in is the ability to manually 
> 'promote' packages into different repos with required or updated deps 
> on the server. Is there any downside to keeping the consumers 'dumb' 
> and hitting the Pulp-managed repositories manually via standard 
> /etc/yum.repos.d/*.conf files?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-list mailing list
> Pulp-list at redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-list at redhat.com>
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-list mailing list
> Pulp-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20150127/1e9a0290/attachment.htm>