Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Current »

Date

Attendees

Discussion items


  • Bob Monkman (Deactivated)
    • Cannot provide 24 machines to ONAP no matter what
    • How many actual servers needed to be supported for ONAP?
    • Not worth using the existing HW in any lab no matter what- "That gear may never even come back up again." (smile)
    • Investigating possibility of funding / donating servers for for installation in an external community managed lab.
    • if new HW can be ordered and placed into a lab managed by someone else, then would ask for a ~90 day  security waiver and then shutdown the lab


  • Morgan Richomme
    • Lab is used primarily for development but also by the integration team
    • did an audit in mid 2020 to identify utilization in an effort to free up resources for CI chain
    • Unnecessary users and VMs were cleaned up and removed.
    • ~300 VMs shared across the community by ~500 devs remain
    • 13 compute servers in active use today 
    • We know how many VMs were being used by each project, still some addl clean up could probably occur since the last one was 6-9 months ago
    • Desire is to retain the same level of compute & storage resources as current lab provides
    • Would like for the hardware to also be used for CI/CD for integration as well - currently only one chain left running in this lab today due to performance and stability issues, but development usage is the priority here.
    • Stephen Gooch had already proposed to move to a more cloud native management model


#Agreed 

  • current lab stays as is for now
  • Intel will look at capex potential - ability to do anything at all?  If so, how quickly?  Bob Monkman (Deactivated)
  • LF will look into hosting locations and maintenance costs @Stevew Ira
  • Will run a new user / vm audit Morgan Richomme



Action items

  •  
  • No labels