TestingServerHardware
|
Size: 5418
Comment:
|
← Revision 14 as of 2008-08-06 16:30:16 ⇥
Size: 7852
Comment: converted to 1.6 markup
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 4: | Line 4: |
| * '''Created''': [[Date(2005-10-31T22:27:51Z)]] by MarkRamm * '''Contributors''': MarkRamm, AdamConrad, IvanKrstic, MalcolmYates, BenCollins * '''Packages affected''': debian-installer, server-testsuite, stress, bonnie++, iperf |
* '''Created''': <<Date(2005-10-31T22:27:51Z)>> by MarkRamm * '''Contributors''': IvanKrstic, MarkRamm, AdamConrad, MalcolmYates, BenCollins * '''Packages affected''': `debian-installer`, `server-testsuite`, `stress`, `iperf` |
| Line 10: | Line 10: |
| We need to do a better job of testing server hardware. To do this we need to: * Get up-to date hardware from IBM / HP / Sun / Apple / Dell to certify against Ubuntu Server 6.04 * Create a comprehensive server test suite for hardware recognition and stress testing * Create an easy way to support and encourage community server testing for extra bug reports |
We need to do a better job of testing Ubuntu on server hardware. To do this we need to: * get up-to date hardware from major server hardware vendors to certify against Ubuntu Server 6.04 * set up a central, official certification facility that performs burn-in and installation testing * create a comprehensive server test suite for hardware recognition and stress testing * create an easy way to support and encourage community server testing for extra bug reports. We will cover official Dapper server certification in this spec. Community server testing has moved to CommunityServerHardwareTesting, as per MattZimmerman's request. |
| Line 17: | Line 20: |
| We need to guarantee that stuff works !! | We're putting a lot of effort into making Dapper rock on servers. Being an enterprise-ready release, we'll be supporting it for five years on servers -- but none of this is much good if we can't guarantee it will run properly on modern server hardware. |
| Line 21: | Line 24: |
| Sophia wants to help test Dapper Drake on her server hardware. | * Company alpha runs all their servers on Ubuntu. They're buying a batch of new servers, and want to make sure they're certified to work with Dapper. |
| Line 23: | Line 26: |
| Jeff has some obscure raid hardware on his machine, and he wants to look up on the web and find out if it will work with Dapper Drake. |
* Company beta is considering switching their data center to Ubuntu. They want to know how much of their hardware is certified to work with Dapper, to gauge the complexity and affordability of the switch. |
| Line 26: | Line 28: |
| Roberta wants to buy a bunch of high end servers that are certified to work with Dapper. |
Community testing use cases are addressed in the community testing spec. |
| Line 31: | Line 32: |
| We would like to certify on 25 machines from the above companies in the Dapper timeframe, and we would like to have community testing of as many server configurations as possible. We need a way to record and track user reports that is seprate from the way we do official server certification. We would also like to have a large number of users test their own server hardware and report the results back to Canonical. |
We would like to certify a minimum of 25 servers in the Dapper timeframe. |
| Line 41: | Line 36: |
| We may want to produce install CD's tailored to specific "certified" hardware, these cd's would be avlalable for purchase by enterprise customers. |
=== Certification facility === |
| Line 44: | Line 38: |
| We will post the results of user testing to the internet so end users can see the results that other have found. |
The Harvard Computer Society will run the central Ubuntu certification facility in Cambridge, MA. HCS will: * provide rackspace for the servers, * provide staff to process inventory, * run the testing suite (both installation and burn-in), * develop and host an Ubuntu-branded server hardware catalogue, both for certified and community-tested hardware, before Dapper is released * provide VPN access to servers under certification (and their lights-out systems such as iLO and LOM) to appointed Ubuntu developers |
| Line 47: | Line 45: |
| We need to investigate the details of using the single Harvard site for testing and certifiation certs. We will need infrastructure to connect to these servers remotely, so we can use them for testing. |
Following testing, the servers will be tasked to do non-critical functions for Ubuntu and HCS, such as providing an Ubuntu archive mirror, or web serving. These services can be easily shut down when Ubuntu developers need to make use of a server to troubleshoot problems. |
| Line 51: | Line 47: |
| * Create a way to track community server test results (talk to ogra about intigration with hwdb) | IvanKrstic will run the certification facility. |
| Line 53: | Line 49: |
| === Installation testing === | |
| Line 54: | Line 51: |
| === Code === | Installation testing does not require developing any new software. Certification facility staff will plop in an Ubuntu-server CD, watch the installation through completion, and make sure the machine was installed properly after rebooting. |
| Line 56: | Line 53: |
| Create a test suite that runs in debian-installer rescue mode. | We eventually want to have a d-i rescue mode profile for server testing. Booting into it would ask people to answer a few questions (which hardware does the system really have, vs. what the system detected automatically), and deliver the result to us. At first, knowledgeable testing facility staff can perform this by hand and a few custom-written scripts. |
| Line 58: | Line 55: |
| The Server Test Suite will ask the users for answers a few questions (which hardware does the system really have, vs. what the system thinks it has), email the result to us => done. | === Burn-in testing === |
| Line 60: | Line 57: |
| Test Suite Should Contain: * basic hardware recognition * Userspace tools for hardware configuration (raid controllers, etc) * Hot plug systems for blades (CPU, memory) * performance (memory bandwidth, disk, CPU, whatever) * include database workload or equivalent for high-level measurements * Burn-in, long term work load testing for stability * multi-system option for network testing (throughput, make sure that the network adapter doesn't go belly-up under load) * Install test, to make sure system can actually have system running. |
We will have a minimal, easily developed burn-in test suite for Dapper. |
| Line 70: | Line 59: |
| Possible tools: * stress(1), package 'stress': tests I/O, CPU, memory * Bonnie for storage testing * iperf or netpipe-tcp for network stuff: evaluate the two * Module PCI tables for checking hardware support (needs code) * Stuff used for the test suite will need to produce udebs for use in d-i rescue mode |
It will contain: * stress(1), package 'stress': I/O, CPU, VM, disk * NLANR's iperf(1), package 'iperf': network stress * a UI to run the tests (described below) |
| Line 77: | Line 64: |
| Test suite might take up to a week to run full burn-in tests, but will need to have a quicker test mode if users are going to test their own hardware and provide us with results. |
A certification burn-in run will be structured as follows: |
| Line 81: | Line 66: |
| Each test will run serially, with a final full stress test of all systems. | * Day 1: I/O burn-in with stress(1) * Day 2: CPU burn-in with stress(1) * Day 3: VM burn-in with stress(1) * Day 4: disk burn-in with stress(1) * Day 5: network burn-in with iperf(1) * Days 6, 7: full stress on all subsystems with iperf(1) and stress(1) |
| Line 83: | Line 73: |
| The inculuded test tools will need a very simple UI that will step through the tests and output the results in a format that can be reviewed by the testing team. Test suite should be automated, and allow for the test operator to perform some out-of-band tests to get details on failures. It should also provide an easy method of shipping the results back to Canonical. |
Burn-in and installation test runs are collected in the HCS-developed server hardware testing catalog. Use of the catalog for community testing is explained in CommunityServerHardwareTesting. |
| Line 89: | Line 75: |
| === Timeframe === | === Load testing UI === |
| Line 91: | Line 77: |
| It would be at least 6-8 weeks before hardware could start shipping from vendors to the hypothetical test centre. This means the server test suite needs to be completed by the end of the year. |
The test suite is wrapped in a shiny ncurses UI that, when started, asks the user whether she wants to perform a full burn-in (7 days) or a micro-burn-in (7 hours). A 7 hour micro-burn-in is assumed to be acceptable for community testing, and runs on the same schedule as a certification burn-in, with days scaled to hours. The UI would run iperf(1) and stress(1) in verbose logging mode, and after a completed burn-in run, would offer to upload the results to the community server hardware testing catalogue via HTTP. The official certification facility would cancel this upload, and upload the logs to the certified server hardware catalogue manually. Because a failed burn-in test often freezes or reboots the machine, the application needs a way to keep test checkpoints. It should write out a checkpoint to disk every 1 hour and at the completion of every test (which resets the timer). The checkpoint file will only be appended to, and so will contain record of any restarted runs; this checkpoint file will also be uploaded to the catalog, which will parse it to see if any tests failed. The application needs to read the check-point file, if it exists, at every start: if it determines a test was interrupted, it should offer to start from the interrupted test instead of starting from scratch. A user-interupted test will be specifically mentioned in the checkpoint file, such that it can be differentiated from unexpected test interruptions due to machine reboots or freezes. === Custom install CDs === We may want to produce install CDs tailored to specific certified hardware. Vendors would pay for the creation of these CDs, possibly as part of the certification process, which would then be available to customers for free. We would base the customized CDs on the hardware list and testing results obtained from our official server certification run. == Timeframe == It would be at least 6-8 weeks before hardware could start shipping from vendors to the HCS certification facility. This means the server test suite needs to be completed by the end of the year. HCS can start receiving and processing hardware in approximately as many weeks. However, actual certification runs can't start before February 1st, 2006. The gap is a one-time setup cost, and will not exist for future releases. This leaves two months for server certification, and since a full certification run (including burn-in testing) takes one week, two months should be more than enough time. |
| Line 97: | Line 97: |
| It is difficult to reconcile Canonical's globally distributed development environment with Hardware Vendor's desire to ship hardware to a single location for testing purposes, however Harvard Computer Society has offered to support a testing facility, including staff to process inventory, run the testing suite , and catalog results. We would also have external IP access to the machines, plus external remote console for the systems (most/all of them?) that support ILO/LOM, etc. |
* Some hardware configurations may require non-distributable software to support (e.g. RAID). Malcolm will need to talk to vendors about being able to distribute those tools as packages in Ubuntu. In the cases where those tools are undistributable (which is the case with many of them), Malcolm will be petitioning vendors to sponsor us creating custom Ubuntu CD images for their hardware. |
| Line 105: | Line 99: |
| Contact: Ivan Krstic <krstic@hcs.harvard.edu> ('krstic' on Launchpad) Some hardware configurations may require non-distributable software to support (e.g. RAID). Malcolm will need to talk to vendors about being able to distribute those tools as packages in Ubuntu. In the cases where those tools are undistributable (which is the case with many of them), Malcolm will be petitioning vendors to spondor us creating custom CD images for their own distribution with their hardware. == BoF agenda and discussion == A different BOF needs to be scheduled to discuss improving/changing debian-installer's rescue mode to make server testing and rescue stuff less painful. |
* At what point in the release cycle does it make sense to start certifying hardware? IvanKrstic is inclined to say right after FeatureFreeze. MattZimmerman: thoughts? * iperf(1) understandably wants a client and a server when running network testing. While this is no problem for the certification facility, we have to make sure we have simple instructions available on how to do this for community testing (luckily, doing it is trivial - it requires a connected machine, one apt-get, and one invocation of iperf). The suite UI needs to ask the user up front about the IP of the iperf peer for the network testing, or allow her to skip that part of the test. ---- CategorySpec |
Launchpad Entry: https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+spec/testing-server-hardware
Created: 2005-10-31 by MarkRamm
Contributors: IvanKrstic, MarkRamm, AdamConrad, MalcolmYates, BenCollins
Packages affected: debian-installer, server-testsuite, stress, iperf
Summary
We need to do a better job of testing Ubuntu on server hardware. To do this we need to:
- get up-to date hardware from major server hardware vendors to certify against Ubuntu Server 6.04
- set up a central, official certification facility that performs burn-in and installation testing
- create a comprehensive server test suite for hardware recognition and stress testing
- create an easy way to support and encourage community server testing for extra bug reports.
We will cover official Dapper server certification in this spec. Community server testing has moved to CommunityServerHardwareTesting, as per MattZimmerman's request.
Rationale
We're putting a lot of effort into making Dapper rock on servers. Being an enterprise-ready release, we'll be supporting it for five years on servers -- but none of this is much good if we can't guarantee it will run properly on modern server hardware.
Use cases
- Company alpha runs all their servers on Ubuntu. They're buying a batch of new servers, and want to make sure they're certified to work with Dapper.
- Company beta is considering switching their data center to Ubuntu. They want to know how much of their hardware is certified to work with Dapper, to gauge the complexity and affordability of the switch.
Community testing use cases are addressed in the community testing spec.
Scope
We would like to certify a minimum of 25 servers in the Dapper timeframe.
Implementation
Certification facility
The Harvard Computer Society will run the central Ubuntu certification facility in Cambridge, MA. HCS will:
- provide rackspace for the servers,
- provide staff to process inventory,
- run the testing suite (both installation and burn-in),
- develop and host an Ubuntu-branded server hardware catalogue, both for certified and community-tested hardware, before Dapper is released
- provide VPN access to servers under certification (and their lights-out systems such as iLO and LOM) to appointed Ubuntu developers
Following testing, the servers will be tasked to do non-critical functions for Ubuntu and HCS, such as providing an Ubuntu archive mirror, or web serving. These services can be easily shut down when Ubuntu developers need to make use of a server to troubleshoot problems.
IvanKrstic will run the certification facility.
Installation testing
Installation testing does not require developing any new software. Certification facility staff will plop in an Ubuntu-server CD, watch the installation through completion, and make sure the machine was installed properly after rebooting.
We eventually want to have a d-i rescue mode profile for server testing. Booting into it would ask people to answer a few questions (which hardware does the system really have, vs. what the system detected automatically), and deliver the result to us. At first, knowledgeable testing facility staff can perform this by hand and a few custom-written scripts.
Burn-in testing
We will have a minimal, easily developed burn-in test suite for Dapper.
It will contain:
- stress(1), package 'stress': I/O, CPU, VM, disk
- NLANR's iperf(1), package 'iperf': network stress
- a UI to run the tests (described below)
A certification burn-in run will be structured as follows:
- Day 1: I/O burn-in with stress(1)
- Day 2: CPU burn-in with stress(1)
- Day 3: VM burn-in with stress(1)
- Day 4: disk burn-in with stress(1)
- Day 5: network burn-in with iperf(1)
- Days 6, 7: full stress on all subsystems with iperf(1) and stress(1)
Burn-in and installation test runs are collected in the HCS-developed server hardware testing catalog. Use of the catalog for community testing is explained in CommunityServerHardwareTesting.
Load testing UI
The test suite is wrapped in a shiny ncurses UI that, when started, asks the user whether she wants to perform a full burn-in (7 days) or a micro-burn-in (7 hours). A 7 hour micro-burn-in is assumed to be acceptable for community testing, and runs on the same schedule as a certification burn-in, with days scaled to hours.
The UI would run iperf(1) and stress(1) in verbose logging mode, and after a completed burn-in run, would offer to upload the results to the community server hardware testing catalogue via HTTP. The official certification facility would cancel this upload, and upload the logs to the certified server hardware catalogue manually.
Because a failed burn-in test often freezes or reboots the machine, the application needs a way to keep test checkpoints. It should write out a checkpoint to disk every 1 hour and at the completion of every test (which resets the timer). The checkpoint file will only be appended to, and so will contain record of any restarted runs; this checkpoint file will also be uploaded to the catalog, which will parse it to see if any tests failed.
The application needs to read the check-point file, if it exists, at every start: if it determines a test was interrupted, it should offer to start from the interrupted test instead of starting from scratch. A user-interupted test will be specifically mentioned in the checkpoint file, such that it can be differentiated from unexpected test interruptions due to machine reboots or freezes.
Custom install CDs
We may want to produce install CDs tailored to specific certified hardware. Vendors would pay for the creation of these CDs, possibly as part of the certification process, which would then be available to customers for free. We would base the customized CDs on the hardware list and testing results obtained from our official server certification run.
Timeframe
It would be at least 6-8 weeks before hardware could start shipping from vendors to the HCS certification facility. This means the server test suite needs to be completed by the end of the year.
HCS can start receiving and processing hardware in approximately as many weeks. However, actual certification runs can't start before February 1st, 2006. The gap is a one-time setup cost, and will not exist for future releases. This leaves two months for server certification, and since a full certification run (including burn-in testing) takes one week, two months should be more than enough time.
Outstanding issues
- Some hardware configurations may require non-distributable software to support (e.g. RAID). Malcolm will need to talk to vendors about being able to distribute those tools as packages in Ubuntu. In the cases where those tools are undistributable (which is the case with many of them), Malcolm will be petitioning vendors to sponsor us creating custom Ubuntu CD images for their hardware.
At what point in the release cycle does it make sense to start certifying hardware? IvanKrstic is inclined to say right after FeatureFreeze. MattZimmerman: thoughts?
- iperf(1) understandably wants a client and a server when running network testing. While this is no problem for the certification facility, we have to make sure we have simple instructions available on how to do this for community testing (luckily, doing it is trivial - it requires a connected machine, one apt-get, and one invocation of iperf). The suite UI needs to ask the user up front about the IP of the iperf peer for the network testing, or allow her to skip that part of the test.
TestingServerHardware (last edited 2008-08-06 16:30:16 by localhost)