[one-users] VM Provisioning, opennebula and virt-install/kickstart

[Mick Pollard]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:51:33 +1100
Mick Pollard <lists at lunix.com.au> wrote:

> G`day,
> 
> I have been evaluating different VM/cloud management tools and so far I am liking Opennebula (it's ruby,has a cli that doesn't really get in the way and takes care of choosing a node for me)
> 
> One common thing I am finding, and not a fan of, is that the solutions I have looked at so far all rely on 'images' to be provisioned.
> 
> I'll explain my current setup and ideas and hopefully get some feedback.
> 
> We are a web development house with many different customers.
> We also host all of our customers ourselves.
> 
> I am wanting to build a 'self serve' VM provisioning tool so my devs can pick a client, have that clients environment deployed to a VM for dev/testing/staging purposes and it be exactly the same as the clients current production environment.
> I have had a quick play with sinatra and the ruby libvirt bindings but would rather write a sinatra portal for my devs that leverages the opennebula framework.
> 
> ## My current (dev/test/staging) environment ##
> 
> * kickstart files shared via HTTP ( one .ks file per customer )
> * yum repos shared via HTTP
> * LVM storage on each node ( want to eventually move to iSCSI )
> * libvirt on each node
> 
> ## The current life-cycle ##
> 
> * use virt-install to install a VM based from the customer's kickstart file and using our yum repos (this repos means the VM has same versions of software as production)
> * puppet then takes over and produces a perfect copy of the client's production environment for the devs to work with (dev/test/stage cycle)
> * devs use the VM then ask me to destroy it when they are finished
> 
> ## Notes about the current system ##
> 
> * each node is managed individually. makes it hard to turn into a self serve web application
> * by using kickstart,my own rpm repos and puppet, the VM is provisioned exactly the same as the customers production environment
> * by not using images I don't have to make sure the image is kept in sync with production; ie, software versions etc
> * is working well but relies on the lone sysadmin too much
> 
> 
> >From what I can see opennebula isn't able to do what I want to achieve right now but is it something that might be possible with some work ?
> Would anyone else be interested ?
> 
> I know my email is very RHEL/centos specific but we are a RHEL/centos shop however I  don't think much more effort would be needed on top of this to use FAI/preseed etc.
> 
> 
> Does opennebula have an irc channel or some other place dev type people might hang out for discussing this sort of thing ?
> 

Anyone ?

-- 
Regards
Mick Pollard ( lunix )
------------------------------------------------
BOFH Excuse of the day:
Delayed Transmission Underflow