Allow os_* services to use a venv¶
python, venv, deployment
Enable the ability for a role to deploy OpenStack python code inside a venv
- There are two problems that we need to start anticipating:
Some OpenStack services are running on physical hosts in the root namespace. This creates a situation where it’s possible for a service to have conflicting requirements with what is already on the host installed through the host package manager. In these situation we’ve found some instabilities that needed workarounds to ensure there are no stability or usage issues with the service.
OpenStack services have started moving toward a non-integrated release which will allow projects to change their release cycle / cadence which will effect versions of services that we deploy. Additionally, these projects may choose to use dependencies outside of what is set in Global requirements.
The use of on metal services, the change in release cycles / cadence, and the likelihood of projects using requirements that conflict with one another requires more separation between the installed projects which lends itself to using a virtual environment for installed OpenStack Python code.
Each os_* role will be modified to support a service running in a virtual environment. This will mean a few new variables to the defaults per-role to determine where the venv will live, change in pip package requirements as the virtualenv package will need to be installed first, changes to the init scripts to support a virtual environment, and a change to the sudoers file to allow the virtual environment bin path to be saved when executing a rootwrap command.
The roles will support the option to deploy in a venv or not. This will be disabled
The playbooks will have an option within them to enable or disable venv support at run time.
Each venv will be named and tagged such that its unique as it pertains to the deployment. This will allow for package upgrade and downgrades on long lived deployements to take place without manual intervention or messing with the hosts packages which may have been installed as part of the base kick and using the operating system package manager.
Leave things unchanged or further pursue re-containerizing services that have been moved to the host. If we decide to go the route of re-containerizing projects that have been moved to the host’s namespace we will need to invest in kernel development to fix several issues we encountered which forced the move to running “is_metal” in the first place.
See Proposed change.
The use of venvs within an environment will not effect an existing deployment nor have any adverse effects on upgrades. Upgrading a service that hadn’t used venvs in the past will be taken care of automatically as init scripts, sudoers files, and rootwrap configs will be changed to support the new venv install.
The benefit of running a service in a venv is apparent when dealing with downgrading a package requirement. This issue has been seen a few times where an upstream OpenStack project has downgraded a python package requirement in the middle of a release. In the current deployment system an administrator is required to manually intervene to resolve package downgrade issues. If the system was using a venv and was tagged based on a given deployment upgrading from one to release to another is as simple as re-running the role from the new released version. The result will be a new venv created for the service and the version. This has an upgrade side effect that will allow for Kilo to Liberty upgrades without having to deal with a epoch wheel build or munging of the wheels repo further simplifying an upgrade in terms of what will be required by the end user.
While not directly related to the implementation of this spec it would be possible for us to extend the virtualenv implementation to allow for building and redistribution of pre-built virtualenvs as a means of speeding up and maintaining reproducibility within an environment.
End user impact¶
When working within a container access to the service management utilities (nova-manage, cinder-manager, etc…) the deployer or administrator working on an environment will need to sourced/activated the virtualenv before running the tools. While this is an extra step there are no other changes that will need to be addressed in the typical deployer workflow.
- Primary assignee:
<cloudnull> - https://launchpad.net/~kevin-carter
- Secondary assignee:
Anyone who wants to help
Update all roles to support venvs
Add a variable to the OSA playbooks to enable venv support within the roles.
Testing this will rely on the gate as a convergence test.
This is implemented in Liberty we can create a simple periodic job in OpenStack infra to test upgrades. The upgrade testing will report back to the OpenStack QA mailing list and key of their periodic job queue.
Documentation will need to be written to acknowledge the venv based deployment and how deployers are to interact with the management tools as provided by the service.