[rdo-dev] [infra][tripleoci] ppc64le container images in registry.rdoproject.org

[Trevor Vardeman]

I've been working with mjturek and baha on this a bit.  I've responded inline below, but also want to clarify on the desired workflow.

TL;DR: The desired workflow is to have ppc64le and x86_64 seamlessly integrated and uploaded.  This can be done with docker manifest list images.

The following link explains in greater detail:  https://docs.docker.com/registry/spec/manifest-v2-2/

The process boils down to the following steps:

1) Upload an image of the first architecture  (ex: image1:x86_64_01012019)
2) Upload an image of the second architecture  (ex: image1:ppc64le_01012019)
3) Upload manifest list image of the image  (ex: image1:01012019)

Step 3 is essentially just pushing a JSON body that has descriptors and references to the other two images, such that when someone does a pull request of the manifest list image, it will gather the appropriate architecture for that image based on the host's architecture.

-Trevor

PS. If I've missed something important with the overall concerns here I apologize, but thought it necessary to spell out the goal as I understand it.

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:28 PM, Javier Pena <jpena at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Over the last few weeks, mjturek and baha have been busy working on a set of
>> periodic jobs to build TripleO images for the ppc64le arch [1].
>> 
>> The current missing step is publishing those images, and they are proposing
>> to push those to the RDO Registry instance at registry.rdoproject.org, just
>> like we do with our TripleO images. I have tried to understand the
>> requirements, and would like to get input on the following topics:
>> 
>> - Which namespace would these images use? Based on some logs [2] it looks
>> like they use tripleomaster-ppc64le, will they also push the images to that
>> namespace?

I have no experience in namespaces inside of a registry or how that differentiates images from one another, but the images should be pushed (in my opinion) to the same location in which the x86 images reside.

>> - Could this create any conflicts with our current promotion pipeline?

This should not cause conflicts in current promotion pipeline, as the process should be an extension to existing functionality.

>> - Is registry.rdo the right place for those images? I'm not familiar with the
>> next steps for ppc64le images after that (will it then go through a
>> promotion pipeline?), so that might affect.

If the x86 images exist in registry.rdo, then the ppc64le (and any other architecture image) should exist there as well.  I can't think of a reason to differentiate between architectures when the desired result is parity and support of more architectures.

>> 
>> If we decide to upload the images to images.rdo, we'll need to do the
> 
> Correction: this should read "registry.rdo"
> 
>> following:
>> 
>> - Create the tripleomaster-ppc64le namespace in registry.rdo, following a
>> similar pattern to [3].
>> - Schedule a short registry downtime to increase its disk space, since it is
>> currently near its limit.

This is definitely necessary, given the capacity requirement will double, give or take, to support the additional architecture.

>> - Update the job at ci.centos to include the REGISTRY_PASSWORD environment
>> variable with the right token (see [4]). This is missing today, and causing
>> the job failure.
>> 
>> Once we get input from all interested parties, we will decide on the next
>> steps.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Javier
>> 
>> 
>> [1] -
>> https://ci.centos.org/job/tripleo-upstream-containers-build-master-ppc64le/
>> [2] -
>> https://centos.logs.rdoproject.org/tripleo-upstream-containers-build-master-ppc64le/422/logs/logs/000_FAILED_tripleoclient.log
>> [3] - https://review.rdoproject.org/r/19063
>> [4] -
>> https://github.com/rdo-infra/review.rdoproject.org-config/blob/master/playbooks/tripleo-ci-periodic-base/containers-build.yaml#L12-L20
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev at lists.rdoproject.org
>> http://lists.rdoproject.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>> 
>> To unsubscribe: dev-unsubscribe at lists.rdoproject.org
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at lists.rdoproject.org
> http://lists.rdoproject.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> 
> To unsubscribe: dev-unsubscribe at lists.rdoproject.org