[FOLIO-2601] PoC for hosted development environment for FOLIO teams Created: 15/May/20 Updated: 26/Aug/20 Resolved: 26/Aug/20 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | FOLIO |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | None |
| Type: | Epic | Priority: | P2 |
| Reporter: | John Malconian | Assignee: | John Malconian |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||
| Epic Name: | Hosted development environment for FOLIO teams | ||||||||||||||||
| Sprint: | DevOps: sprint 90, DevOps: Sprint 95, DevOps: Sprint 96 | ||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | FOLIO DevOps | ||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Provide hosted, FOLIO sandboxes for FOLIO development teams. The idea is similar to FOLIO developer vagrant environments except hosted on AWS.
|
| Comments |
| Comment by John Malconian [ 15/May/20 ] |
|
Considerations:
|
| Comment by Jakub Skoczen [ 18/May/20 ] |
|
Anton Emelianov we are thinking about setting up the PoC rancher project for a team env based on "platform-core" rather than "platform-complete". Did you guys consider which team would be testing the setup? We want to make sure they are OK with platform-core modules only. Thanks. |
| Comment by jroot [ 22/May/20 ] |
|
This is a good layout and methodology, essentially what we are doing at Tamu for some aspects. I do have a few suggestions: It is best to set up the cloud-provider for storage classes before you create the clusters in Rancher. You can do it after the fact, but it is much better and straight forward to pass in that config at cluster creation time. The same can be said for Project and/or namespace resource limits. It is a little cumbersome to add those to namespaces after the fact. I have not determined what a bare minimum amount of resources are to run Folio from a Project/namespace perspective. I have set up container resource reservations and limits for each Folio back-end module - however mine are not very conservative. There are however no cpu minimums that have been calculated. For now I have picked some arbitrarily low milli cpu amount for the Workload (like 10) and some arbitrarily high milli cpu for a limitation (like 500 or more). I do have monitoring and metrics set up for the cluster and Projects, so I could get a good minimum for each module, I just have not done so yet. |
| Comment by jroot [ 22/May/20 ] |
|
A head's up I forgot to mention: Rancher just launched a certification program that is free right now. It is a great training tool to become more familiarized with Rancher and its workings: https://academy.rancher.com/courses/course-v1:RANCHER+K101+2019/about |
| Comment by Marc Johnson [ 02/Jun/20 ] |
It was my understanding that the pilot team for this is going to be FoliJet, that makes it unlikely that the core rather than complete is appropriate as their primary area of interest is data import. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 02/Jun/20 ] |
|
Hi Marc Johnson If it's Folijet, only 1 of our modules is platform-core, though of course we interact lots with UIIN and MODINV. All the other data import apps (plus related ones like Export and quickMARC) are in platform-complete. Please let me know if that's an issue. |
| Comment by John Malconian [ 02/Jun/20 ] |
|
yeah, initially we'll be looking at deployment of modules based on platform-core only. So if Folijet is not the appropriate team, perhaps core-functional is. We'll discuss on our next status call. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 02/Jun/20 ] |
|
John Malconian Hmm, that definitely limits the scope of possible teams. Not sure there would be any besides Core-fxn that would qualify. |
| Comment by Jakub Skoczen [ 03/Jun/20 ] |
|
This is likley going to be implemented in two phases:
|
| Comment by Peter Murray [ 18/Jun/20 ] |
|
For budgeting/billing purposes, can the resources associated with these hosted development environments for teams be assigned AWS tags? The FOLIO steering group would like to separate out the charges for these environments. |
| Comment by Peter Murray [ 29/Jun/20 ] |
|
Hey, Jakub Skoczen and John Malconian: Just checking on the last comment here to see if the system setup will allow for an accounting of the costs of the hosted development environments as a separate item (e.g. with AWS tags?—I think I can create budget reports based on tags.) |
| Comment by John Malconian [ 30/Jun/20 ] |
|
Peter Murray Yes, eksctl, the tool used to create AWS ec2 nodegroups for kubernetes, does support the use of tags. However, Since nodegroups are mostly immutable, I'd have to create two new nodegroups with the tags to replace the existing nodegroups which is a bit of pain. I can do this migration but not right away. If it is at all helpful, I can tell you that all ec2 resources running in us-east-2 (ohio) and us-west-2 (oregon) are used almost exclusively for this project. |
| Comment by Peter Murray [ 30/Jun/20 ] |
|
Sorry, John—I wasn't clear in my initial question. The request is for the hosted development environments (the environments for the development teams) and not the hosted reference environments that the SIGs use. Are they all being mixed into the same k8 cluster? |
| Comment by John Malconian [ 01/Jul/20 ] |
|
Not at this time, Peter Murray. All resources in us-east-2 and us-west-2 are specifically utilized for the hosted dev environment. |