Closed Bug 1388367 Opened 8 years ago Closed 7 years ago

we need to revisit the balrog staging instance we use for staging releases

Categories

(Release Engineering :: Release Automation, enhancement, P2)

enhancement

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1409170

People

(Reporter: mtabara, Unassigned)

References

Details

(Whiteboard: [releaseduty])

We tried last week a lot to get as far as we could with staging releases to prevent us from delaying beta. Yet, there were still a bunch of things that couldn't be caught due to miscommunication to balrog staging instance: * updates builder fails after tagging, as it can't establish connection to balrog staging * we don't know which credentials to use * with updates builder not working, updates verification didn't run, hence we didn't catch some macosx/win32/win64 errors * etc We need to revisit this conversation and reache a point where we ship full staging releases from staging buckets, on all ends. This would help us anytime, catch unwanted issues.
I *think* the reason we're using a dev instance is because of netflows, as in - staging balrog is not accessible on the internet, only through our vpc - releasetasks balrog runs on docker-worker, which is on the internet, not our vpc We previously used a proxy which was error prone. The real solution is probably to get all of releasetasks in-tree, so we can use balrog scriptworkers, which live in the vpc. A shorter term solution may involve improving the dev docker instance to be able to pre-populate releases and partials? Or revisit the proxy, which isn't ideal. Or spin up a dev balrogworker pool that can only talk to a dev balrog instance.
(In reply to Aki Sasaki [:aki] from comment #1) > I *think* the reason we're using a dev instance is because of netflows, as in > > - staging balrog is not accessible on the internet, only through our vpc > - releasetasks balrog runs on docker-worker, which is on the internet, not > our vpc > > We previously used a proxy which was error prone. > > The real solution is probably to get all of releasetasks in-tree, so we can > use balrog scriptworkers, which live in the vpc. > A shorter term solution may involve improving the dev docker instance to be > able to pre-populate releases and partials? Or revisit the proxy, which > isn't ideal. Or spin up a dev balrogworker pool that can only talk to a dev > balrog instance. Thanks a lot :aki for this, I missed the netflows logic. This is a good item to talk at the postmortem so I'll add it there and remove it as a hard-dependency for bug 1388357 as we already shipped that last night. Will continue this conversation as I suppose we'll need staging releases sooner than we can finish up the in-tree releasetasks, which is quite a standalone project.
No longer blocks: 1388357
See Also: → 1388357
Priority: -- → P4
Whiteboard: [releaseduty]
Priority: P4 → P2
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.