Add Deploying OCI images with custom IPA Hardware Manager post #601
Conversation
|
Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request. |
metal3-io-bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
✅ Deploy Preview for metal3io-website ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
metal3-io-bot
added
the
size/XXL
s3rj1k
force-pushed
the
custom-deploy
branch
4 times, most recently
from
5d70888 to
91ecd87
Compare
metal3-io-bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
Signed-off-by: s3rj1k <[email protected]>
s3rj1k
force-pushed
the
custom-deploy
branch
from
91ecd87 to
88b7cdb
Compare
|
The post does not render in the listing, I wonder why: https://deploy-preview-601--metal3io-website.netlify.app/blog/ |
yea, had to run render locally |
|
|
||
| ## Introducing the deb_oci_efi_lvm Hardware Manager | ||
|
|
||
| The `DebOCIEFILVMHardwareManager` is a custom IPA hardware manager that |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: a link would be handy here
| partition | ||
| - **Optional RAID1** - Software mirroring across two disks for | ||
| redundancy | ||
| - **Cloud-init integration** - Ironic configdrive data is written |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: maybe make "configdrive" a link to https://book.metal3.io/bmo/instance_customization.html#implementation-notes for context?
| The deployment process extracts an OCI image using Google's `crane` tool, | ||
| then installs the necessary boot infrastructure on top. The default image | ||
| is `ubuntu:24.04`, but any Debian-based image can be specified via an | ||
| annotation on the BareMetalHost object. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Side question: why not use the standard spec.image.url? Is there some validation that gets in your way?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess you are referring to metal3-io/baremetal-operator@0d9fc3a, I would very much like using spec.image.url and might just migrate to that with newer BMO.
Still, for the post, I think it is worth keeping annotation configuration example, and maybe adding a note about a possibility to use spec.image.url with newer BMO.
Annotation config is not directly obvious when reading general CustomDeploy docs.
| online: true | ||
| bootMode: UEFI | ||
| rootDeviceHints: | ||
| # Two space-separated serial numbers enable RAID1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Side note: you could probably also use MetaData to pass arbitrary stuff to the installation process.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm mentioning it because the way it is here, this BMH cannot be used by any other Metal3MachineTemplate. This is not a concern for you, but may become a concern for somebody following your post.
|
|
||
| # Get the download URL | ||
| if [ "${CRANE_VERSION}" = "latest" ]; then | ||
| DOWNLOAD_URL=$(curl -s https://api.github.com/repos/google/go-containerregistry/releases/latest | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm curious if you considered using podman, which is readily available in CS9 and also has the export command.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hmm, I guess that can also be an option
| DEVICE_WAIT_DELAY = 5 | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def run_command(cmd, check=True, capture_output=True, timeout=300): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yea, I was avoiding reusing IPA code as much as possible, reason is to avoid keeping this in constant sync with IPA changes and retesting, but might be a good idea to mention that similar function exists in IPA and can be reused
|
|
||
| <!-- markdownlint-enable MD033 --> | ||
|
|
||
| ```python |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It could be useful to split this very large code block into smaller parts with separate commentary, and potentially organize it in a reversed way: start by showing the highest level code (the deploy step itself), then descend into details. You may even decide to omit helper functions, pointing at your repository instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted to have a code snapshot in the post itself, so maybe splitting into separate code functions would be nicer, repo link for a full solution yes
|
This is awesome! I've left a couple of comments, the only important one is about reorganizing the code block. We also need to figure out why the post does not render... |
3 participants
No description provided.