'quincy' named Track request for Microceph

store-requests
1

Hey! Currently Microceph only has the latest track which is not really favourable. We would like to have named tracks consistent with upstream ceph releases… which would require a track called ‘quincy’ and be made default.

Regards,

2

Hello,

Per Process for aliases, auto-connections and tracks, we need a 1-week voting/discussion period, so I’ll check back on the discussion and votes in a few days.

I have three questions before casting my vote.

  1. What’s microceph’s release cadence, how often is a new major version (potentially requiring a new track) released? is this documented somewhere by upstream?
  2. Is there some commitment from upstream on maintenance of old versions? e.g. is the “P” release still supported with security updates? will it continue to be supported now that quincy is out, and for how long?
  3. Are new versions backwards-incompatible? meaning, if I was running P and try to install quincy, will that just work, or do I need to migrate my data/configuration, or will things break horribly?

Thanks!

  • Daniel
3

Hey, Thanks for your questions, I’ve answered them as follows:

  1. Microceph will follow upstream Ceph releases, in that, there would be a ‘reef’ release soon. Ceph follows annual release cycles but it’s not very strictly timed.

  2. Microceph will not have a ‘P’ release. ‘Q’: quincy is our first release version. Since each ceph version is supported for 2 release cycles (2 years), the Q release will EOL in 2024/06 approximately when the ‘S’ release will come out.

  3. Migrations just work! Jumping from Q to R or S should be fairly simple.

Please let me know if there is need of any other information.

Thanks, Utkarsh

4

I’m +1 to grant this track to microceph, though I wonder:

Is it “I need to do one manual thing” simple, or “it’s all done automatically” simple?

because if it’s the former, then a track would definitely work so people don’t upgrade and break things, but if it’s the latter and it’s all handled automatically, then you probably don’t need a track, people can just upgrade to the latest at all times, right?

  • Daniel
5

Hello Daniel,

Upgrading Ceph versions is fairly (a situational mix of both for your question) simple but I don’t think “people can just upgrade to the latest at all times” is a good idea for Microceph, it brings risk of behavioural changes, regressions and possible (though not very probable) data loss. Sticking to a release based track (say quincy) will also ensure the certainty of expectations for users (latest is a changing target).

However, I do agree that staying latest at all times is great for tooling like Browsers, CLI clients etc, where users would prefer to have the latest version anyways.

Regards, Utkarsh Bhatt

6

+1, the quincy track is now created and available.

  • Daniel
2 Likes