Pulp: Issueshttps://pulp.plan.io/https://pulp.plan.io/favicon.ico2020-10-20T14:06:47ZPulp
Planio Pulp - Task #7724 (NEW): Improve runtime of new installation of Pulphttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/77242020-10-20T14:06:47Zbmbouterbmbouter@redhat.com
<p>The request to make the installer go faster</p>
<pre><code>A tower standalone install with automation hub takes about ~40 mins. Which is almost more than double of a normal
Tower install. It seems the most of the time we spent is on pulp-common role. Is there anything we are planning to do
in terms of making it little faster (not running same tasks many time, which pulp common role does) ?
</code></pre> Pulp - Story #7689 (NEW): As a user I want my socket to be backed up by a systemd implementationhttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/76892020-10-12T13:25:04Zspredzy
<p>As a user I want my socket to be backed up by a systemd implementation.</p>
<p>Under its current form, the installer allows one to use unix domain socket, but not to configure them with a native systemd implementation. This is a RFE for this.</p> Pulp - Task #7668 (NEW): remove pid files from the systemd service fileshttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/76682020-10-07T17:05:32Zdkliban@redhat.com
<p>Systemd does not need explicitly defined pid files to keep track of the services. We should make a change the systemd service files similar to the change here: <a href="https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-pulpcore/commit/b3b7c133c513dd2c30b00a81e64b2bb33ca92397" class="external">https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-pulpcore/commit/b3b7c133c513dd2c30b00a81e64b2bb33ca92397</a></p> Pulp - Task #7638 (NEW): Fix ansible_python_interpreter issues in pulp_installerhttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/76382020-10-01T18:03:57Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>There are 3 minor / potential issues pertaining to this.</p> Pulp - Issue #7627 (NEW): Can't use the installer with iptables (and firewalld being masked)https://pulp.plan.io/issues/76272020-09-30T07:40:36Zttereshcttereshc@redhat.com
<p>From a user report on irc:</p>
<pre><code>I am trying to install the latest version of pulp using ansible and am getting an error in regards to the firewall towards the end of the run
Fatal: [host1]: FAILED! => {"changed": false, "msg": "Unable to enable service firewalld: Failed to execute operation: Cannot send after transport endpoint shutdown\n"}
Would it have something to do with, "Ansibles Python interpreter must have the package installed: * psycopg2 * firewall (if firewalld should be configured; you can disable that with pulp_configure_firewall=false)"
I looked for the string "pulp_configure_firewall" in the ansible collection but from what i see the only two options are "Valid values are 'auto', 'firewalld',"
firewalld was masked as iptables was in use on the box.. once i unmasked it the playbook could complete
</code></pre> Pulp - Task #7482 (NEW): pulp_installer change(s) for Recommended installation layouthttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/74822020-09-09T14:45:55Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>See parent task.</p>
<p>We will just tell pulp_installer users to stop the services before upgrading, instead of the symlink. We will still perform the directory move though.</p> Pulp - Task #7281 (NEW): Update docs to state that installer can only install one cluster at a timehttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/72812020-08-05T14:39:19Zdkliban@redhat.com
<p>The documentation needs to have a "Known limitations" section. One of the items should state that that the installer can only install one Pulp cluster at a time.</p> Pulp - Story #7007 (NEW): As a user, I do not have to worry about Pulp being accidentally upgrade...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/70072020-06-18T15:40:06Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>We should pursue using dnf versionlock to accomplish this.</p>
<p>This is needed because handlers/tasks "Run database migrations" will not be run if users run <code>dnf update</code>. Pulp would be broken until users re-run the installer.</p> Pulp - Task #6904 (NEW): Document using https://pypi.org/project/pulpcore-releases/ for the insta...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/69042020-06-03T15:25:07Zbmbouterbmbouter@redhat.com
<p>The Pulp Dependency Checker is a great tool to show compatibility between a pulpcore version and various concerns.</p>
<p>We should do three things:</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>Move the pdc tool to the pulp org.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Add a very obvious link to the pulp_installer docs recommending users to use the tool to determine pulpcore and plugin compatibility</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Update the error message that the installer puts out when the pre-flight check fails. Have that error message point users to specifically check which plugins are compatible with the pulpcore version the installer is trying to install.</p>
</li>
</ol> Pulp - Issue #6896 (NEW): [pulp_installer] Parametrize postgres package in roles/pulp_databasehttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/68962020-06-03T11:03:10Zspredzy
<p>As a user, while the default postgresql package is called rh-postgrelsql96 - which is fine - I would like to be able to specify a different package name, as we can specify various diffferents parameters name.</p>
<p>It is currently hardcoded at the playbook level[1] which prevents any overloading.</p>
<p>[1] <a href="https://github.com/pulp/pulp_installer/blob/master/roles/pulp_database/tasks/install_postgres.yml#L13" class="external">https://github.com/pulp/pulp_installer/blob/master/roles/pulp_database/tasks/install_postgres.yml#L13</a></p> Pulp - Task #6798 (NEW): Document the new guidelines for plugin installation logichttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/67982020-05-21T18:47:54Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>There are 3 places they could be:</p>
<ol>
<li>A role in a separate git repo and on galaxy.</li>
<li>A separate role in the pulp_installer repo (pulp_rpm will be this.)</li>
<li>Conditional logic within the pulp_installer's other roles.</li>
</ol> Pulp - Story #6797 (ASSIGNED): [epic] As a user, I can consume all the plugin prereq roles in the...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/67972020-05-21T18:45:22Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>pulp_rpm_prerequisites exists because the installer has had a plugin neutral policy.</p>
<p>This policy was for very long misunderstood: It's not about avoiding favoritism to any plugins, it's about not tying the installer (which is tied to pulpcore releases) to plugin releases. So that say pulpcore 3.3 logic would be in pulp_installer 3.3 release, and so that pulp_cardboardbox 0.7 logic would be in the pulp_cardboardbox_prerequisites 0.7 role.</p>
<p>The team now agrees that this policy is counter-productive because:</p>
<ol>
<li>Having a role in a separate repo (not part of the pulp_installer collection) is extra work for developers, and for users.</li>
<li>The only plugin that currently needs a prereq role, pulp_rpm, has version numbers and releases that correspond to pulpcore releases. pulp_rpm 3.3.z needs pulpcore 3.3.z, etc. So the pulp_rpm specific installation logic can be safely bundled in pulp_installer 99% of the time.</li>
</ol> Pulp - Task #6747 (NEW): Demo video for pulp_installerhttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/67472020-05-14T21:48:07Zfao89
<ul>
<li>Video should not have audio</li>
<li>
<a href="https://asciinema.org/" class="external">https://asciinema.org/</a> - records terminal output and can be embedded in our docs and in the README on github</li>
<li>include RPM and Container plugins</li>
</ul> Pulp - Issue #6274 (NEW): Problem: existing Pulp deployments with system-wide packages conflict w...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/62742020-03-03T19:51:59Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>Note: This issue is specificaly about running ansible-pulp against existing deployments of Pulp.</p>
<p>Manual testing with <a href="https://quay.io/repository/pulp/pulp_rpm-ci-c7" class="external">centos 7 pulp_rpm images</a> reveals that we can modify /usr/local/lib/pulp/pyvenv.cfg to not use system-wide packages anymore, and then let the <code>pip install</code> commands fix the missing dependencies. So this is the approach that ansible-pulp should take when <code>pulp_use_system_wide_pkgs</code> is false (or perhaps whenever centos 7 is in use.)</p> Pulp - Story #5618 (NEW): As a user, I can download & run a version of the ansible installer that...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/56182019-10-25T08:37:28Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>Currently users are encouraged to get the latest ansible-pulp roles via git cloning. Later on, Ansible Galaxy.</p>
<p>The only stable tag ever done was 3.0.0rc1. Presumably we will create them for 3.0.0 and later.<br>
<a href="https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp/releases" class="external">https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp/releases</a></p>
<p>However, consider the following scenario (hypothetical release dates):<br>
1. They download the roles (either method) on Apr 1. They are versioned as 3.0.3 and install pulp 3.0.3<br>
2. They run them against their test env and it works.<br>
3. Pulp 3.1.0 & ansible-pulp 3.1.0 are released on Apr 15.<br>
4. They run the 3.0.3 roles against their prod env on May 1.<br>
5. The 3.0.3 roles try to install pulp 3.1.0 from pip, but fails due to the lack of new logic.</p>
<p>It would make sense to have a variable for the pulp version to install, that defaults to the same version as the roles, but can be overriden (but doing so is discouraged.)</p>
<p>Plugin versions would also be an issue. Let's discuss how this can be handled.</p>
<p>Also, I am not sure if there is an existing task for publishing the roles (other than pulp_rpm_prerequisites) to Ansible Galaxy (pulp project on it.):<br>
<a href="https://galaxy.ansible.com/pulp" class="external">https://galaxy.ansible.com/pulp</a></p>