Project

General

Profile

Actions

action #19190

closed

make use of ix64ph1014, e.g. for proxymode

Added by okurz about 7 years ago. Updated 6 months ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Low
Assignee:
Category:
-
Target version:
Start date:
2017-05-17
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:

Description

[17 May 2017 08:52:46] coolo: do we still need https://openqa.suse.de/tests/latest?machine=ix64ph1014 ?
[17 May 2017 08:54:40] okurz: well, I have no love left for this vnc thingie
[17 May 2017 08:54:52] okurz: we better free this machine and use it for proxymode
[17 May 2017 09:08:38] good morning
[17 May 2017 09:09:53] coolo: so I will delete the machine in openQA and delete the schedule?
[17 May 2017 09:10:51] okurz: leave the machine as documentation how to set this up. It might still be wanted in the future - for another machine
[17 May 2017 09:11:00] but drop the job

okurz: I dropped the job from scheduling

Actions #1

Updated by nicksinger about 7 years ago

  • Subject changed from make use of ix64ph1014, e.g. for proxymode to [labs] make use of ix64ph1014, e.g. for proxymode
  • Status changed from New to Feedback
  • Priority changed from Normal to Low

First: please use the [labs] tag next time :)
Second: What am I supposed to do with this machine now? At 08:54:52 coolo (btw; who said what is not really obvious from your extract) suggest to free this machine. Just a couple of minutes later he said: "[17 May 2017 09:10:51] okurz: leave the machine as documentation how to set this up. It might still be wanted in the future - for another machine".

Please update the description in more detail. Until then I change this to feedback/low as reminder that this machine exists for reference reasons.

Actions #2

Updated by okurz about 7 years ago

I don't mind the low-prio. Basically it was intended as just a reminder

Actions #3

Updated by livdywan over 4 years ago

Is this ticket still relevant?

Actions #4

Updated by okurz about 4 years ago

@nicksinger could you please check if the machine still exists and/or is connected and powered on? In the easiest case we can just ensure the machine is disconnected, powered off and potentially de-inventarized and we do not need to care about it.

Actions #5

Updated by livdywan about 4 years ago

Any update on the ix64ph1014? Is it powered off now?

Actions #6

Updated by nicksinger almost 4 years ago

okurz wrote:

@nicksinger could you please check if the machine still exists and/or is connected and powered on? In the easiest case we can just ensure the machine is disconnected, powered off and potentially de-inventarized and we do not need to care about it.

The machine is still present and should be powered off. I agree that we can dispose this machine or at least don't consider it as production grade hardware any longer. However I'd also not push this forward anymore since the lab has quite some other machines which need to be disposed and I want to do it all together - at least I need to understand the process first (which is still not 100% clear to me or people I approached).

Actions #7

Updated by sebchlad almost 4 years ago

I'm doing some testing with real storage array and for that I would need VM/server which would be controlling the whole system under test.
After talking with Nick about some possibilities, we agreed that this server could be used; at least I would check if this server would do for this purpose.

I will update the ticket in some weeks/months once I concluded if this machine is OK for the purpose.

Actions #8

Updated by sebchlad almost 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to In Progress
  • Assignee changed from nicksinger to sebchlad
  • Priority changed from Low to Normal
Actions #10

Updated by sebchlad almost 4 years ago

  • Subject changed from [labs] make use of ix64ph1014, e.g. for proxymode to [labs][kernel][storage] make use of ix64ph1014, e.g. for proxymode
Actions #11

Updated by sebchlad almost 4 years ago

  • Parent task set to #71521
Actions #12

Updated by sebchlad almost 4 years ago

  • Target version set to 445
Actions #13

Updated by pcervinka over 3 years ago

  • Target version changed from 445 to 640
Actions #14

Updated by pcervinka over 3 years ago

  • Tags set to storage
  • Project changed from openQA Tests to 178
  • Subject changed from [labs][kernel][storage] make use of ix64ph1014, e.g. for proxymode to make use of ix64ph1014, e.g. for proxymode
  • Category deleted (Infrastructure)
Actions #15

Updated by pcervinka over 3 years ago

  • Tags deleted (storage)
  • Project changed from 178 to openQA Infrastructure
  • Status changed from In Progress to Workable
  • Assignee changed from sebchlad to nicksinger
  • Target version deleted (640)

Machine will not be used for storage testing. We can return it to tools team. Seba suggested to assign this case to Nick.

Actions #16

Updated by okurz over 3 years ago

  • Target version set to Ready
Actions #17

Updated by pcervinka over 3 years ago

  • Parent task deleted (#71521)
Actions #18

Updated by nicksinger over 3 years ago

  • Assignee deleted (nicksinger)

Machine is therefore available again

Actions #19

Updated by okurz over 3 years ago

  • Assignee set to nicksinger

Without at least remote access provided to other members of SUSE QE Tools I doubt anyone other than you can do something:

  • Is remote access possible? If not, can you provide it? (ping -4 ix64ph1014.qa reaches 10.162.2.14 but no success with ssh)
  • Should the machine be decommissioned as discussed in #19190#note-6?

If the machine would be remotely accessible or if you can provide the characteristics we can find out what usecase it would be usable for.

Actions #20

Updated by nicksinger over 3 years ago

  • Assignee deleted (nicksinger)

okurz wrote:

Without at least remote access provided to other members of SUSE QE Tools I doubt anyone other than you can do something:

  • Is remote access possible? If not, can you provide it? (ping -4 ix64ph1014.qa reaches 10.162.2.14 but no success with ssh)

Well, you quite heavily insisted that the machine gets powered off if nobody is using it. Therefore you can't reach it atm.
As for IPMI I don't think the machine has it. I couldn't find a trace to it on qanet

  • Should the machine be decommissioned as discussed in #19190#note-6?

Hard to say without specs. And without physical access it is even harder to get the specs ;)
I think it is perfectly fine for experiments e.g. people wanting to setup Kubernetes or as jump-host.

If the machine would be remotely accessible or if you can provide the characteristics we can find out what usecase it would be usable for.

Actions #21

Updated by okurz over 3 years ago

  • Target version changed from Ready to future

yes but as you know nobody within our team except for you even has physical access to the machine. What else should I do with this ticket, add "[labs]" and set target version to "future"? Should we discuss the general labs topic in general a bit more? Especially in light of maybe not many returning to the office and especially not labs anytime soon. Maybe we clarify with TL and director how we can handle hardware in our labs in the future more efficiently for all of us.

Actions #22

Updated by okurz about 3 years ago

  • Due date set to 2021-06-06
  • Status changed from Workable to Feedback
  • Assignee set to okurz
  • Target version changed from future to Ready

@mgriessmeier can you help us/me ensuring that the machine ix64ph1014 is either used properly or decomissioned?

https://gitlab.suse.de/openqa/salt-pillars-openqa/-/merge_requests/319

EDIT: MR merged

The only racktables reference is only a network reference in
https://racktables.nue.suse.com/index.php?page=ipv4net&tab=default&hl_ip=10.162.2.14&id=23
no physical location or other characteristics.

ping -4 ix64ph1014.qa.suse.de works

Actions #23

Updated by okurz about 3 years ago

  • Due date changed from 2021-06-06 to 2021-12-01
  • Assignee changed from okurz to mgriessmeier
  • Priority changed from Normal to Low
  • Target version changed from Ready to future

As discussed with mgriessmeier in Rocket.Chat mgriessmeier will take care. He already did an update to inventory and that machine seems to not be in the QA labs otherwise all machines not listed in racktables would have been switched off.

Actions #25

Updated by okurz 6 months ago

  • Due date deleted (2021-12-01)
  • Status changed from Feedback to Resolved
  • Assignee changed from mgriessmeier to okurz
  • Target version changed from future to Ready
Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF