-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Upgrading nodes from Rancher #330
Comments
@agracey @rancher/elemental any input and thoughts about this topic would be appreciated. |
If the |
The channel json must be manually (well, I don't see an easy way to automate it) created since it's us who decide which version to support and which not. |
Added
to the initial list |
👍 on not supporting |
👍 on not supporting automatic upgrades. (Might be revisited based on market requirements). |
timestamp based ? That's already how the updater decides if an image is newer. |
I would expect your assumption to be true for now. I can't imagine having wholly different OSes being distinguished by tags (like some images do with
I would think a job polling for new tags would be sufficient? I don't think this would generate noticibly more traffic than most CI systems already do?
I would love to see a pattern where release notes and closed CVEs are listed in the image annotations. This would mean that an admin would be able to see the diff between versions and decide when to upgrade (reducing downtime without increasing risk). I don't know how much work that would be to build though.
Agreed, listing image tags and correlating the hash and build timestamp is likely enough?
IMO, this could be left to a higher level automation. We just need to make sure the API is stable and fully featured to build against. |
Yep, this is a discussion we really need!
so, the idea is to have a json file inside a container? 🤔
👍🏼 totally agree!
I would stick with @agracey idea: pull the json from time to time. Overhead should be not noticeable.
🤔 if we use a json, I would just add a reference to the official release notes (which I expect mainly be for the OS release) directly in the json. We can even think about having OS release notes and elemental ones (to separate OS changes an elemental proper ones) and add them only if/when needed.
👍🏼 yep, makes sense. Especially since the json will get updated with all the available versions.
I am ok to not have it for now... but at some point this is something we should allow. Like the @agracey idea of leaving it to an higher level automation tool. |
well the benefit or convenience of using a container is that we already have infrastructure and processes to actually deliver it, we can use the container registry. I'd also go to a web server, but I am clue less about how this should be handled form a maintenance point of view, this goes beyond the regular process of publishing RPM repositories or containers in a registry form OBS. In any case this is a tiny implementation detail, the relevant part is that we go for building and maintaining a list of available images in a json format compatible with elemental-operator.
Sure the polling strategy is already in place, my question is more in the lines of should there be some logic somewhere to raise a notification somewhere (in the UI?) to make the admin aware new updates are available (imagine an important security fix)? I believe, for now, we can expect the admin to be proactive and manually check available updates time to time. But I am convinced we will need some sort of notification mechanism so admin can react on unexpected important updates (security fixes mostly).
This is a though topic, I wonder whats being done for the BCI images on that regard. I'll try contact them to check if someone is already doing such a thing within the company for container images. OBS gives us |
To sum up the discussion/comments, for now (short term), I believe we can state:
Action items:
@agracey @rancher/elemental if you are fine with it I am willing to close this card and create new ones for each action item. |
Closing since follow up issue are created. They are linked and listed within the comment above. |
Assume the upgrade procedure as defined in docs. So there are two ways:
For the 1st option not much to say, it is a manual process and the administrator has full freedom to update whatever she/he wants to. I believe this option is clearly good to keep it, but should it be supported? IMHO we shouldn't and some sort of warning should be tracked in logs when used.
For the 2nd there are details to figure out
rancher/elemental-teal:latest
and assume elemental operator is capable to keep upgrading on each newlatest
release. IMHO we should not support this use case, tends to be confusing.Last but not least, we should discuss the essential tests for an upgrade acceptance criteria on each release:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: