[Pulp-list] Pulp in production

Aaron Johnson acjohnson at pcdomain.com
Fri Jul 22 03:28:49 UTC 2016


Thank you for the response, we upgraded to pulp 2.8.6 today so we are hoping things will improve.

Is there any response from the devs on the release strategy for pulp?



On Jul 20, 2016, 10:04 PM, at 10:04 PM, Alejandro Cortina <alejandro.cortina2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>we had the issues you mentioned with 2.8.3, updated to 2.8.4 and so far
>(+/- 1 month I guess) is working smooth.
>
>On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 2:57 AM, <acjohnson at pcdomain.com> wrote:
>
>> I am looking for recommendations on what release of Pulp is
>recommended
>> for production deployments.
>>
>> We have been running Pulp 2.3 in production for the past year and are
>> currently building out new production infrastructure to deploy our
>new
>> production Pulp environment on top of.
>>
>> We planned to deploy the latest stable release of Pulp which at the
>time
>> was Pulp version 2.8.3.
>>
>> We have Pulp 2.8.3 running on the new infra and are currently dealing
>with
>> various pulp tasks hanging with State: Waiting and Start Time:
>Unstarted
>>
>> I've noticed that the Katello project has recently upgraded their
>stable
>> release (3.0 currently) to use Pulp 2.8.4 packages located here:
>>
>>
>https://fedorapeople.org/groups/katello/releases/yum/3.0/pulp/el7/x86_64/
>>
>> And previously Pulp 2.6 was used as the stable packages for Katello
>> (skipping Pulp 2.7 altogether).
>>
>> For production deployments is Pulp 2.8.x the recommended release to
>use,
>> or should people be deploying Pulp 2.9.x in prod, or just skip Pulp
>2.9.x
>> and use for devel environments only?
>>
>> Hopefully this question makes sense to you. It would be nice if the
>Pulp
>> project had some sort of LTS release (Long Term Support) to help
>guide
>> users to the most stable branch of development.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160721/43d60389/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pulp-list mailing list