13 Sep
2023
13 Sep
'23
5:02 p.m.
now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away from centos stream
8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
building/testing them on main asap
13 Sep
13 Sep
6:32 p.m.
Too aggressive IMHO. Corporate deployments can't rev their OS instantly and lots of
people have delayed going to 9 pending shakeout of the RH vs Rocky situation.
On Sep 13, 2023, at 10:02, Casey Bodley
<cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote:
now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away from centos stream
8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
building/testing them on main asap
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
8:13 p.m.
thanks Anthony,
users have had the opportunity to upgrade both during quincy and reef,
so this isn't forcing an instant decision. if you're concerned about
the future of centos, you can either stay on Reef or use our container
images or deb packages for S
i don't think it's reasonable to expect the Ceph project to maintain
support for centos 8 indefinitely. long-term support has always been
the distro's responsibility
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 11:32 AM Anthony D'Atri <anthony.datri(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Too aggressive IMHO. Corporate deployments can't rev their OS instantly and lots of
people have delayed going to 9 pending shakeout of the RH vs Rocky situation.
On Sep 13, 2023, at 10:02, Casey Bodley
<cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote:
now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away from centos stream
8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
building/testing them on main asap
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
8:24 p.m.
CentOS 9 came out ... ~~ 1.5 years ago? Arguably borderline for being considered
obsolete.
I'm not suggesting indefinitely, but I think we're sometimes too aggressive given
corporate realities.
On Sep 13, 2023, at 13:13, Casey Bodley
<cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote:
thanks Anthony,
users have had the opportunity to upgrade both during quincy and reef,
so this isn't forcing an instant decision. if you're concerned about
the future of centos, you can either stay on Reef or use our container
images or deb packages for S
i don't think it's reasonable to expect the Ceph project to maintain
support for centos 8 indefinitely. long-term support has always been
the distro's responsibility
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 11:32 AM Anthony D'Atri <anthony.datri(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Too aggressive IMHO. Corporate deployments can't rev their OS instantly and lots of
people have delayed going to 9 pending shakeout of the RH vs Rocky situation.
On Sep 13, 2023, at 10:02, Casey Bodley
<cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote:
now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away from centos stream
8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
building/testing them on main asap
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
14 Sep
14 Sep
9:37 a.m.
Am 13/09/2023 um 19:24 schrieb Anthony D'Atri:
CentOS 9 came out ... ~~ 1.5 years ago? Arguably
borderline for being considered obsolete.
I'm not suggesting indefinitely, but I think we're sometimes too aggressive given
corporate realities.
CentOS 9 will be still supported FWICT, the original mail talks about
CentOS Stream 8, which was released about 4 years ago and goes EOL on
May 31, 2024, which is not long after Ceph S will be even released as
stable the first time, possibly even before that if S gets a bit delayed
like reef did..
I have no skin in the Ceph on CentOS game, but IMO it doesn't seem
aggressive to stop support for a distribution in a release if the
distribution is going EOL around the time of when said release is
actually done. I mean, I wouldn't expect that Debian Bullseye still
gets support for Ceph S, it's main support will be EOL in ~ July 2024
too. But maybe not the best comparison as major upgrades between Debian
releases are relatively easy and work since decades, so it's not as big
of an issue there for corporate users.
10:54 a.m.
CentOS 9 came
out ... ~~ 1.5 years ago? Arguably borderline for being
considered obsolete.
I'm not suggesting indefinitely, but I think we're sometimes too
aggressive given corporate realities.
11:12 a.m.
Am 14/09/2023 um 09:54 schrieb Marc:
CentOS 9 will be still supported FWICT, the original mail talks about
CentOS Stream 8, which was released about 4 years ago and goes EOL on
May 31, 2024, which is not long after Ceph S will be even released as
stable the first time, possibly even before that if S gets a bit delayed
like reef did..
I have no skin in the Ceph on CentOS game, but IMO it doesn't seem
aggressive to stop support for a distribution in a release if the
distribution is going EOL around the time of when said release is
actually done. I mean, I wouldn't expect that Debian Bullseye still
gets support for Ceph S, it's main support will be EOL in ~ July 2024
too. But maybe not the best comparison as major upgrades between Debian
releases are relatively easy and work since decades, so it's not as big
of an issue there for corporate users.
I am a bit confused, I think I missed some news. "Ceph S"? Is that a new stream
version or so?
No, S is just the next letter after R (for Reef) in the Alphabet, and means
the next major release (i.e. 19.2) planned for 2024. S is used as short form
of the actual codename, not sure if already definitive but it seems "Squid"
was the most popular: https://pad.ceph.com/p/s
CentOS 9 came out ... ~~ 1.5 years ago? Arguably
borderline for being
considered obsolete.
I'm not suggesting indefinitely, but I think we're sometimes too
aggressive given corporate realities.
Ceph is currently still developed on rhel9 not? Or is this switching to a stream version?
For my upgrade path I would like to chose the distribution closest to the
development/testing environment.
FWICT: Ceph isn't developed on a single distro, but targets some distros
specifically, which means creating builds for them, and having those
included in CI/testing.
3:40 p.m.
>> CentOS 9 will be still supported FWICT, the
original mail talks about
>> CentOS Stream 8
Let's remember that good ol' plain CentOS 8 still exists and likely has more users
than Stream FWIW.
>> which was released about 4 years ago and goes
EOL on
>> May 31, 2024, which is not long after Ceph S will be even released as
>> stable the first time, possibly even before that if S gets a bit delayed
>> like reef did..
>>
>> I have no skin in the Ceph on CentOS game, but IMO it doesn't seem
>> aggressive to stop support for a distribution in a release if the
>> distribution is going EOL around the time of when said release is
>> actually done.
I hadn't accounted for that offset in my prior reply. If Squid releases most of a
year from now (has the cadence relative to Reef actual vs target been decided?) then I
grudgingly concede that's long enough.
OS sunsetting is more problematic when the dropped release is such that one can't
feasibly update it in-situ, but one can update from Rocky/CentOS 8 ->9 without
reimaging and without a change of init system.
No, S is just the next letter after R (for Reef) in
the Alphabet, and means
the next major release (i.e. 19.2) planned for 2024. S is used as short form
of the actual codename, not sure if already definitive but it seems "Squid"
was the most popular: https://pad.ceph.com/p/s
Squid for S was kind of inevitable.
6:33 p.m.
Hi Casey,
I guess this doesn't matter for cephadm users anyway. I don't think we
track it via the telemetry, but it would be nice to know how many users are
cephadm vs packages.
BTW, is the container image already based on steam 9 for Reef and Squid?
Cheers, Dan
--
Dan van der Ster
CTO
Clyso GmbH
p: +49 89 215252722 | a: Vancouver, Canada
w: https://clyso.com | e: dan.vanderster(a)clyso.com
We are hiring: https://www.clyso.com/jobs/
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 7:03 AM Casey Bodley <cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote:
now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away
from centos stream
8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
building/testing them on main asap
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
9:16 p.m.
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 11:33:21 AM EDT Dan van der Ster wrote:
Hi Casey,
I guess this doesn't matter for cephadm users anyway.
The cephadm "binary" is limited to supporting the lowest common python version
available on all the supported platforms. It runs outside of a container
context. So currently the binary is limited in what python stdlib modules and
languages features. I'd personally be interested in being able to use python
versions newer than Python 3.6.
The current refactoring project and the "compiled" cephadm make are on track
to make it supporting older Python a little less burdensome as we'll be able
to eventually use a small curated set of non-stdlib dependencies. But there
are good language level improvements (newer type hinting syntax comes to mind)
that I'd personally like to use.
I don't think we track it via the telemetry, but
it would be nice to know
how many users are cephadm vs packages.
Yes please :-)
BTW, is the container image already based on steam 9
for Reef and Squid?
I just double checked main branch CI images - they're based on Centos 8
Stream. I'm pretty sure, but didn't verify, that reef images are too.
Cheers, Dan
--
Dan van der Ster
CTO
Clyso GmbH
p: +49 89 215252722 | a: Vancouver, Canada
w: https://clyso.com | e: dan.vanderster(a)clyso.com
We are hiring: https://www.clyso.com/jobs/
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 7:03 AM Casey Bodley <cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away from centos stream
> 8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
> distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
> building/testing them on main asap
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
10:28 p.m.
Hi John,
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 11:17 AM John Mulligan
<phlogistonjohn(a)asynchrono.us> wrote:
Do you expect any problems rebasing on Stream 9 ?
Cheers, dan
>
> > Cheers, Dan
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dan van der Ster
> > CTO
> >
> > Clyso GmbH
> > p: +49 89 215252722 | a: Vancouver, Canada
> > w: https://clyso.com | e: dan.vanderster(a)clyso.com
> >
> > We are hiring: https://www.clyso.com/jobs/
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 7:03 AM Casey Bodley <cbodley(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > > now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away from centos stream
> > > 8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
> > > distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
> > > building/testing them on main asap
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 11:33:21 AM EDT Dan van der Ster wrote:
Fair enough -- I just wanted to point out that what we support via
"packages" -- what Casey is discussing -- is very different from what
we as a project support in general.
Cephadm allows Ceph to support "any modern Linux distro" [1] and we
should try not to alter that principle.
[1] https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/cephadm/install/#requirements
Hi Casey,
I guess this doesn't matter for cephadm users anyway.
The cephadm "binary" is limited to supporting the lowest common python version
available on all the supported platforms. It runs outside of a container
context. So currently the binary is limited in what python stdlib modules and
languages features. I'd personally be interested in being able to use python
versions newer than Python 3.6.
The current refactoring project and the "compiled" cephadm make are on track
to make it supporting older Python a little less burdensome as we'll be able
to eventually use a small curated set of non-stdlib dependencies. But there
are good language level improvements (newer type hinting syntax comes to mind)
that I'd personally like to use.
I don't
think we track it via the telemetry, but it would be nice to know
how many users are cephadm vs packages.
Yes please :-)
BTW, is the container image already based on
steam 9 for Reef and Squid?
I just double checked main branch CI images - they're based on Centos 8
Stream. I'm pretty sure, but didn't verify, that reef images are too.
15 Sep
15 Sep
10:51 p.m.
On 14-09-2023 17:33, Dan van der Ster wrote:
Hi Casey,
I guess this doesn't matter for cephadm users anyway. I don't think we
track it via the telemetry, but it would be nice to know how many users
are cephadm vs packages.
+1
BTW, is the container image already based on steam 9 for Reef and Squid?
For Reef it is CentOS 8 stream. Squid should make the jump to CentOS 9
stream.
Gr. Stefan
14 Sep
14 Sep
7:06 p.m.
We'll need to update the performance lab nodes (they are on Centos8
stream still), but that's not the end of the world. Honestly I was
planning on doing it anyway sooner or later.
I do have some concerns similar to Anthony. I know users who are still
running CentOS 7 in production and are just struggling to get off that.
We're pretty aggressive regarding needing Compiler/OS upgrades versus a
lot of projects out there and at times it feels somewhat unnecessary.
I guess my take is that there's a balancing act here. If supporting
older distros is a major burden and blocker for future growth it makes
sense to drop them. If we're dropping them because we want to chase
brand new C++ language features that are exciting and fun but not
fundamental for the project, that's less of a justification imho.
Mark
On 9/13/23 09:02, Casey Bodley wrote:
> now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away from centos stream
> 8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
> distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
> building/testing them on main asap
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
7:19 p.m.
I think new development needs to be able to advance at at least the speed
of evolution of c++ and the shipping compiler and toolchain implementations
in modern Linux distributions. How the project deals with retiring old
stable releases is orthogonal, but I think Casey's position seems
reasonable.
Matt
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 12:06 PM Mark Nelson <mark.a.nelson(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
We'll need to update the performance lab nodes
(they are on Centos8
stream still), but that's not the end of the world. Honestly I was
planning on doing it anyway sooner or later.
I do have some concerns similar to Anthony. I know users who are still
running CentOS 7 in production and are just struggling to get off that.
We're pretty aggressive regarding needing Compiler/OS upgrades versus a
lot of projects out there and at times it feels somewhat unnecessary.
I guess my take is that there's a balancing act here. If supporting
older distros is a major burden and blocker for future growth it makes
sense to drop them. If we're dropping them because we want to chase
brand new C++ language features that are exciting and fun but not
fundamental for the project, that's less of a justification imho.
Mark
On 9/13/23 09:02, Casey Bodley wrote:
--
Matt Benjamin
Red Hat, Inc.
315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103
http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage
tel. 734-821-5101
fax. 734-769-8938
cel. 734-216-5309
now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path
away from centos stream
8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
building/testing them on main asap
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
15 Sep
15 Sep
11:11 p.m.
Hi,
On 13-09-2023 16:02, Casey Bodley wrote:
now that Reef gives our users an upgrade path away
from centos stream
8 and ubuntu 20.04, i propose that we drop support for those old
distros from the S release. if there's agreement here, we can stop
building/testing them on main asap
I would agree on that. If we can also agree that S will be build on both
Ubuntu 22.04 and Ubuntu 24.04 as well.
When using packages I like to have the opportunity to change either the
OS version, or the Ceph version, but not both at the same time. It makes
troubleshooting (performance) issues so much easier.
Unfortunately this is often not possible for Ubuntu releases. Like for
Quincy, it's only available for Ubuntu 20.04, but not 22.04.
And that's unfortunate really. Actually Sage Weil mentioned this during
Cephalocon in Barcelona as something that he would like to address. And
it is one of the reasons the one year release cycle was chosen. It
should make it easier to align major OS releases with Ceph. However,
because of this misalignment, Mimic was not picked up by main stream
distros, and hardly used in comparison to Luminous and Nautilus.
Having said that, new clusters that we will build will be based on
Cephadm (and maybe in a far away future Rook). And then it's easy to
stay on the same OS while upgrading Ceph, or vice versa. So it doesn't
matter anymore.
Gr. Stefan
16 Sep
16 Sep
midnight
This.
When charting a path from Ubuntu Trusty / Luminous to Bionic / Nautilus ISTR having to
plan an intermediate step using Ubuntu-bundled packages, which was not ideal.
Enterprises like to let new major releases of anything soak before rollout * , and
qualification / infrastructure readiness take time and contend with other tasks that are
seen as more mission-critical from an if-it-ain’t-broke perspective.
The use of containers to factor out dependencies is valid, but not universally an option.
* “Never install any even-numbered release of anything”
>
> When using packages I like to have the opportunity to change either the OS version,
or the Ceph version, but not both at the same time.
247
days inactive
249
days old
15 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Anthony D'Atri -
Casey Bodley -
Dan van der Ster -
Dan van der Ster -
John Mulligan -
Marc -
Mark Nelson -
Matt Benjamin -
Stefan Kooman -
Thomas Lamprecht