[lxc-users] Newer upstream releases - Stable for production?

Wed Apr 5 21:53:01 UTC 2017

Yes, it would be.

I also disagree that it's what most people would want.

The majority of the feedback we've been getting from production users so
far is that they're very happy having an extremely stable version of LXD
that they don't need to think about and that gets frequent bugfixes and
security fixes.

For everyone else, you just need to run:

    apt install -t xenial-backports lxd lxd-client

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:45:32PM +0200, Jakob Gillich wrote:
> Would it be against distribution policy to upgrade the lxd package in
> xenial? I feel like most users do not want 2.0, but that's what they get by
> default.
> 
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:49 AM, Stéphane Graber <stgraber at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > So it really depends on how tolerant you may be to accidental downtime
> > and need to occasionaly adapt scripts as new features are added.
> > 
> > LXD 2.0.x only gets bugfixes and security updates and so an upgrade will
> > never break anything that uses the LXD commands or the API.
> > 
> > 
> > For the newer feature releases, we don't break the REST API, only add
> > bits to it, but occasionaly those bits mean that some extra
> > configuration steps may be needed, as was the case with the network API
> > in 2.3 or the storage API in 2.9.
> > 
> > Upgrading to such releases will automatically attempt to migrate your
> > setup so that it keeps working and doesn't suffer any downtime. But it's
> > certainly not completely bug free and we do occasionaly hit issues
> > there.
> > 
> > 
> > If you do want the new features, I'd recommend that you at least stay on
> > Ubuntu 16.04 LTS, then do this:
> > 
> >     apt install -t xenial-backports lxd lxd-client
> > 
> > This will install lxd and lxd-client from "xenial-backports" which is a
> > special pocket of the main Ubuntu archive. This is far preferable from
> > using the LXD PPA.
> > 
> > The LXD stable PPA is automatically generated whenever a new upstream
> > release has hit the current Ubuntu development release and has passed
> > automatic testing, which is to say that when an update hits, it would
> > have seen very little field testing.
> > 
> > xenial-backports is different in that the packages in there are the same
> > as the PPA, but I only push them through once I feel confident there
> > aren't any upgrade issues that we should address.
> > 
> > 
> > One recent example of that was the storage API. PPA users would have
> > gotten LXD 2.9, 2.9.1, 2.9.2, 2.10, 2.10.1 and 2.11 in quick sucession
> > as we were sorting out some upgrade issues with the storage API.
> > 
> > Users of xenial-backports were on LXD 2.8 up until yesterday when I
> > pushed LXD 2.12 to it as we are now feeling confident that all upgrade
> > issues that were reported have been satisfyingly resolved.
> > 
> > 
> > One last note. LXD doesn't support downgrading its database, that means
> > that if you upgrade from 2.0.x to some 2.x release, there is no going
> > back. You can't downgrade back to 2.0.x afterwards. You can move LXD
> > containers from a new release to a server running an older release as we
> > way to do a two stage downgrade, but you may need to alter their
> > configurations a bit for this to succeed (remove any option key that
> > came from a newer release).
> > 
> > Stéphane
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 02:55:32PM +0200, Gabriel Marais wrote:
> > >  Hi Guys
> > > 
> > >  I would like to take advantage in some of the new(er) features
> > > available in
> > >  releases higher than 2.0.x
> > > 
> > >  Would it be advisable to upgrade to 2.12 to be used in a production
> > >  environment?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  --
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  Regards
> > > 
> > >  Gabriel Marais
> > > 
> > >  Office: +27 861 466 546 x 7001
> > >  Mobile: +27 83 663 2222
> > >  Mail: gabriel.j.marais at gmail.com
> > > 
> > >  Unit 11, Ground Floor, Berkley Office Park
> > >  Cnr Bauhinia & Witch Hazel Str,
> > >  Highveld, Centurion, South-Africa
> > >  0157
> > > 
> > >  PO Box 15846, Lyttelton, South Africa, 0140
> > >  _______________________________________________
> > >  lxc-users mailing list
> > >  lxc-users at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> > >  http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users
> > 
> > --
> > Stéphane Graber
> > Ubuntu developer
> > http://www.ubuntu.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > lxc-users mailing list
> > lxc-users at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lxc-users mailing list
> lxc-users at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users

-- 
Stéphane Graber
Ubuntu developer
http://www.ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-users/attachments/20170405/efa9e2d6/attachment.sig>