On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:14 AM Alfredo Moralejo Alonso <
amoralej(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 2:52 PM Carlos Goncalves <cgoncalves(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 1:58 PM Alan Pevec <apevec(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Carlos,
>>
>> > Octavia roadmap includes adding support to new features and
>> performance improvements only available starting in HAProxy 2.0. CentOS 8
>> ships with HAProxy 1.8, and according to the package maintainer there are
>> no plans to provide HAProxy 2.x in a foreseeable future.
>> > I have rebuilt HAProxy 2.2 from Fedora rawhide against CentOS 8 and
>> CentOS Stream in [1] and validated it passed Octavia tests in [2] [3]
>> (patchset 3, ignore newer ones).
>> > We would like to check if it would be possible to provide the latest
>> stable LTS HAProxy 2.2 in RDO repositories.
>>
>> Since HAProxy is networking related and could be used outside
>> OpenStack, I'd like to consider building and hosting it by rebooted
>> NFV CentOS SIG.
>>
>
I'll bring the topic in next NFV SIG meeting
> We should avoid pilling up deps in RDO repos, adding them is the last
>> option as per our deps guidelines [1]
>>
>
> Works for me.
>
>
>>
>> Can you also give us short intro how is haproxy included and used in
>> Octavia?
>> If it were a containerized service, we might be able to take the
>> container image from Openshift/OKD ?
>>
>
> The HAProxy RPM is installed in the base operating system,
> a non-containerized environment. The amphora provider, the reference
> open-source provider, orchestrates the life-cycle of amphorae instances
> (service VMs) including HAProxy to deliver load balancing services to
> tenant application environments.
>
>
haproxy is used out of octavia/amphora to balance across api services,
iirc, so we should check with other consumers in TripleO.
I've built haproxy-2.2.2 and pushed to
https://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/8/nfv/x86_64/network-extras/ for
testing.
First CI jobs show an issue when balancing redis traffic in TripleO
deployment. I've sent a fix for it in:
https://review.opendev.org/#/c/749525/
I'll try to involve maintainers for other impacted services to validate it.
>
>> Cheers,
>> Alan
>>
>> [1]
https://www.rdoproject.org/documentation/requirements/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev(a)lists.rdoproject.org
>
http://lists.rdoproject.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
> To unsubscribe: dev-unsubscribe(a)lists.rdoproject.org
>