Get the IDR playbooks working smoothly with multiple deployments#124
Get the IDR playbooks working smoothly with multiple deployments#124joshmoore merged 25 commits intoome:masterfrom
Conversation
|
Conflicting PR. Removed from build MANAGEMENT_TOOLS-merge#970. See the console output for more details.
|
|
Conflicting PR. Removed from build MANAGEMENT_TOOLS-merge#973. See the console output for more details.
|
|
--exclude This is the combined state of the other PRs. Getting those in first. |
The only thing that's not in idr-omero.yml is screen
This should be handled outside this playbook. In addition running upgrade-distpackages in docker may cause problems if it updates core libraries e.g. systemd.
If you need web access use the idr-web-external security group instead
This supercedes os-create.yml and os-volumes.yml, which can be removed in future
|
As discussed I've refactored |
|
I've disabled the default nginx header in c135ef4, this shouldn't be needed any more since ome/openmicroscopy#4744 means the displayed host is generated on the client side not the server, and if it's enabled you always get redirected to idr-demo instead of whatever server you're trying to test.. |
|
Couple of questions:
|
👍
I'll remove them in a later PR once we know this works at EBI.
The main benefit was for testing the changes to infrastructure, in production it should be a one off copy so the time penalty doesn't matter so much. If you get any timeout or "not ready" errors just re-run |
| idr-playbooks/idr-dundee-nfs.yml \ | ||
| idr-playbooks/idr-ebi-nfs.yml \ | ||
| idr-playbooks/idr.yml \ | ||
| idr-playbooks/idr-docker.yml |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
True...that's in my other branch
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| BASTION_IP=10.0.0.0 | ||
| IDR_ENVIRONMENT=idr | ||
| ansible-playbook \ | ||
| -i inventory/openstack-private.py \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For this to work, I have to remove clouds.yaml
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the public repo so the instructions are designed to work as far as possible without any private config. I assumed any internal instructions would be elsewhere
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Understood, but in general, I think we may still need to re-evaluate openstack-private.py (later)
|
Disabled |
|
Shooting for having this to be in 0.3.0-rc1 (of IDR) |
|
No objections in chat. Only non-IDR change is the selinux blocker. Merging. |
Get the IDR playbooks working smoothly with multiple deployments
Replaces
vm_prefixwithidr_environmentin all openstack IDR playbooks, adds this as a group prefix in all IDR playbooks.This means every server in an IDR deployment is in the following three groups
database-hostsomero-hostsgateway-hosts{{idr_environment}}-hosts{{idr_environment}} -database-hosts{{idr_environment}} -omero-hosts{{idr_environment}} -gateway-hostsIn practice this means it is possible to configure variables for
At present (3) should only contain one server (which can be addressed as e.g.
{{idr_environment}} -database-hosts[0], if we implement load-balancing there may be more than 1.This also reverts some changes to
ansible.cfgfrom #112 in order to get this repo working, these changes should be reverted in adevelopmentorbreakingbranch until everyone's happy.idr_environmentdefaults toidrso that the IDR playbooks can be run without any private configuration. In most cases you should setidr_environmentto something else and add matching group vars files. For example see# IDR multinode omeroin VagrantfileFixes the following from the config issue:
fatal: [demo3-omero]: FAILED! => {"failed": true, "msg": "Failed to get information on remote file (/etc/security/limits.d/95-omero.conf): MODULE FAILURE"}(idr-omero.yml))[0]for which host to use is dangerous since it assumes one type per cloud.Includes:
vagrant upbrings up all nodes #120For tidiness this PR should be rebased after merging the above three.