launchpad development|
Size: 5356
Comment:
|
← Revision 88 as of 2011-06-06 22:02:02 ⇥
Size: 7541
Comment: PQM tag to use for rc
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| ## page was renamed from PolicyAndProcess/ReleaseManagerRotation | |
| Line 3: | Line 4: |
| * '''Process Name:''' Release Manager Rotation Process | * '''Process Name:''' Monthly DB deployment with downtime |
| Line 10: | Line 11: |
| Each cycle a different engineer takes the role of release manager. The release manager coordinates with the release team and all team leads to ensure that the tree is ready for the roll-out and that all critical bugs are in or worked-around. |
Each month a DB downtime is scheduled. The team lead schedules this with the Launchpad stakeholders and LOSAs. It is broadly scheduled up to a year in advance on [[DowntimeDeploymentSchedule|the downtime schedule]]. The scheduled time should overlap with availability from the DBA |
| Line 15: | Line 13: |
| Back-up release managers are the two RMs from the previous two cycles. | The launchpad engineers request a merge from db-stable of *only* QA-ok commits 48 hours before the scheduled time. The db downtime then deploys just that merge revision and where possibly only does schema changes. |
| Line 17: | Line 15: |
| == Release Manager inputs == | Other downtime requiring events (such as codehosting setup changes) have partial downtime scheduled as required. == DB-stable->devel merge imputs == |
| Line 20: | Line 20: |
| * OOPS reports * Merge proposals |
* Deployment reports * [[https://devpad.canonical.com/~lpqateam/qa_reports/deployment-stable.html|stable]] * [[https://devpad.canonical.com/~lpqateam/qa_reports/deployment-db-stable.html|db-stable]] |
| Line 25: | Line 26: |
| === Before the roll-out === | === Coordinator (LP Team lead) === |
| Line 27: | Line 28: |
| * At the beginning of week 4. Make sure that release-critical was turned on in PQM. (Monday 00:00 UTC) |
* Negotiate and confirm the dates and times for the main release window and a backup release window with the following groups. Refer to the [[DowntimeDeploymentSchedule|the downtime schedule]] for the pre-scheduled dates and times (we have a process in place to ensure our release calendar does not conflict with Ubuntu; conflicts normally do not happen). The goal is to confirm that the scheduled downtime does not interrupt other teams at critical times, to ensure that the release window does not place undue stress or risk upon our own operations team, and renegotiate the dates and times if necessary. Note when scheduling that services on Launchpad can begin being paused up to half an hour before the rollout. |
| Line 30: | Line 30: |
| * Determine the schedule and deadlines. Send an email to launchpad-dev with all of the deadlines, similar to this [[ExampleReleaseScheduleEmail|example email]]. Place the deadlines on the team calendar. | * the stakeholder's list (private-canonical-launchpad-stakeholders@lists.launchpad.net). * the LOSAs (losas@canonical.com) * the DBA (Stuart Bishop <stuart.bishop@canonical.com>) |
| Line 32: | Line 34: |
| * Update the `#launchpad-dev` topic to state we are in 'Release Critical' and to list the release manager. | Let Matthew Revell <matthew.revell@canonical.com> know the time to announce it. |
| Line 34: | Line 36: |
| * Maintain the list of the [[CurrentRolloutBlockers|Current roll-out blockers]] | The downtime window is always 90 minutes; if less time is consumed, great. If more time is needed, we go back to the drawing board to figure out how to do it faster. |
| Line 36: | Line 38: |
| The release manager should poll the team leads and QA engineers continuously to ensure that the list of release blockers is up-to-date. (We need to explore a work-around to retire this wiki page and do the management in Launchpad.) |
Re-announce downtime so it serves as a reminder on [[http://identi.ca/launchpadstatus|launchpadstatus]] account at '''least 4h''' before the actual rollout. You can do this yourself with the [[https://wiki.canonical.com/Launchpad/PolicyandProcess/Announcements/Downtime|identi.ca login info]]. |
| Line 40: | Line 40: |
| All bugs that are likely to cause lots of OOPSes, time-outs or prevent several users from working are good CRB candidates. |
Ensure that Matt Revell has a downtime announcement email ready for lp-announce. Again, make sure it's noted that some LP services (e.g. soyuz) can go offline temporarily up to half an hour before the rollout. |
| Line 43: | Line 42: |
| It's a good idea to subscribe yourself to the page. (Currently broken.) | === Engineering responsibilities === |
| Line 45: | Line 44: |
| * Make sure that developers are assigned to all problems we want to fix. | * All QA for db changes must include checking that the aggregate database time is within budget. To find out how long the database updates will take to deploy on production, double the aggregate time from staging and add 10 minutes. Grep for lines like "2208-30-0 applied just now in 70.5 seconds"in devpad:/x/launchpad.net-logs/staging/sourcherry/2011-*-staging_restore.log * If the aggregate time is too large, either merge less than all the possible revisions, or back out the problem revision. This is part of qaing on db-stable. |
| Line 47: | Line 47: |
| * Review release-critical merge proposals. The policy should be: * All RC candidates go through the normal review process. * After code and UI review the MP is left in 'Needs Review' state. * A new review of type 'release-critical' is added to the MP and assigned to the release manager. * If the MP is approved for 'release-critical', the review is marked 'Approve' and the state of the MP is set to 'Approved'. |
* Ask losas to merge db-stable rev XXX to `devel` and put PQM into RC mode. ('on prae as pqm {{{cd /home/pqm/archives/rocketfuel/launchpad/devel; bzr update; bzr revert; bzr merge -r 10381 lp:~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/db-stable; bzr commit -m "Merge db-stable 10381." ; bzr push lp:~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/devel}}}. If there are conflicts a developer should reproduce the merge and tell the LOSA how to resolve them. * After buildbot blesses the merge ask LOSA to do the upgrade to qastaging ('refresh the qastaging tree on sourcherry, run normal upgrade scripts there') * '''While in RC mode:''' * Anyone can land 'release-critical' branches on `devel` that contain changes that would prevent the deployment from succeeding. This include fix or reversal for items marked `qa-bad`. Use `[release-critical=<you>]` in the PQM commit message. * A good rule of thumb to apply is: Does landing this change will save us from handling [[https://wiki.canonical.com/Launchpad/PolicyandProcess/CrisisHandlingPolicy|an incident]] during or shortly after the deployment? In the affirmative, land it! * For all other changes (features that would be delayed, nice to have fixes, annoyances to user, etc.) approval is required from either the [[https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-leader|project lead]], [[https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-architect|technical architect]] or [[https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-strategist|product strategist]]. * Ask losas to take PQM out of RC mode once verifying that qastaging is working well (e.g. re-qa all the schema changes included in the merge). * Update the `#launchpad-dev` topic to state 'PQM in RC mode' and then reverse it. |
| Line 53: | Line 58: |
| * Make sure all the cowboys listed on [[https://wiki.canonical.com/InformationInfrastructure/OSA/LaunchpadProductionStatus|LaunchpadProductionStatus]] are either already landed or are added to the 'unusual rollout requirements' on that same page, so that the LOSAs will re-apply the cowboys after the rollout. It is definitely preferable not to re-apply cowboys, so it's a good idea to track down who hasn't landed a permanent fix yet. | |
| Line 54: | Line 60: |
| === On the day before the roll-out === | * If some unexpected problems are encountered during the roll-out and these put the roll-out schedule off-track by more than 30 minutes, and it can be aborted, then it should be aborted. In that case: |
| Line 56: | Line 62: |
| * Request that landing to the `devel` branch be closed, 24 hours before the scheduled release. All changes should on the last day be merged through `db-devel`. | * Identify the source of the problem and come up with a best estimate on how soon it can be fixed. |
| Line 58: | Line 64: |
| * Determine when the next attempt should be undertaken (usually: the backup window) and make sure it is announced. Give at least 24 hours of advance warning (because the readonly replica takes 24 hours to restore). | |
| Line 59: | Line 66: |
| === On the day of the roll-out === | ==== After the roll-out ==== |
| Line 61: | Line 68: |
| * Chase up ''Current Rollout Blockers'' and any other pending release-critical fixes. |
* Immediately after the roll-out, examine the site for problems. For example, ensure CSS loads properly, all external links on the front page are reachable, etc. |
| Line 64: | Line 70: |
| * With PQM remaining open, have the LOSAs stop buildbot and set it do manual runs. * Remind people that all changes need to be in buildbot for '''9 hours''' before the roll-out time. The LOSAs require two hours of pre-release preparation and we need to allow for two complete buildbot cycles. (9 = 2 + 2 * 3.5) |
* Announce on `launchpadstatus` that the release is done. |
| Line 69: | Line 72: |
| * In the case of failures, it's best to roll-out the last-known-good-build rather than delaying the release. The cut-off point to decide which revision to roll out is '''2 hours''' before the scheduled release. |
* Announce any post-roll out issues on `lauchpadstatus` as they are discovered. Create incident reports for them. (Following the Launchpad/PolicyandProcess/Announcements/IncidentProcess). |
| Line 73: | Line 74: |
| === Database Patches === | |
| Line 74: | Line 76: |
| === After the roll-out === | * If the qa-ok of a patch merged to devel was faulty and a fix is needed, this shouldn't impact the downtime - if it will, the entire thing should just be backed out. |
| Line 76: | Line 78: |
| * With the QA engineers, review the OOPS reports. | == References == |
| Line 78: | Line 80: |
| All common OOPSes are candidates for more release-critical fixes and scheduling another roll-out. * Prepare and schedule any necessary re-roll. * When a re-roll is needed, same activities than in the pre-roll out case. * Open the tree, when the released version is fine for the next cycle. * The release-manager needs to select the next release manager. == Release critical policy == * To apply for a release-critical approval, you must have a reviewed merge proposal on Launchpad. The engineer adds a review of type `release-critical` to the merge proposal and ensures it is in the 'Needs Review' state. * Good candidates for release-critical approval are issues found during QA that are bound to create OOPSes and time outs or otherwise significantly inconvenience our end-users. * Apart from special exceptions discussed with the project lead, only bug fixes should be granted release-critical approval. * If there is no way for the developer to QA his change on staging through the normal update procedure before the roll-out, it's recommended to request a cowboy of the branch on staging to QA it before approval. * For the second roll-out (a.k.a. the re-roll), any change requiring database changes should go through the project lead, since DB updates seriously increase the length of the upgrade window. == Scheduling == * Engineers apply in advance for one cycle. * They are selected by the previous release manager. Once selected, their name is put on the [[https://wiki.canonical.com/InformationInfrastructure/OSA/LaunchpadProductionStatus|Launchpad Production Status page]]. * The actual roll-out time is determined by the release-manager's location: || Location || Roll out time || || Americas || 00:00UTC || || Europe || 09:00UTC || || Asia/Pacific || 00:00UTC || * No engineer should apply for the role more than twice a year. |
* [[https://wiki.canonical.com/InformationInfrastructure/OSA/LaunchpadRollout | OSA Launchpad Rollout Procedures]] * SpuriousFailures -- useful for diagnosing last-minute build failures * [[https://wiki.canonical.com/InformationInfrastructure/OSA/LaunchpadProductionStatus|Launchpad production status]] * [[https://wiki.canonical.com/Launchpad/PolicyandProcess/ProductionChangeApprovalPolicy|Approval of production change]] * [[https://wiki.canonical.com/Launchpad/PolicyandProcess/EmergencyChange|Emergency change (aka cherry-picks)]] |
Process Name: Monthly DB deployment with downtime
Process Owner: Francis Lacoste
Parent Process/Activity: None
Supported Policy: None
Process Overview
Each month a DB downtime is scheduled. The team lead schedules this with the Launchpad stakeholders and LOSAs. It is broadly scheduled up to a year in advance on the downtime schedule. The scheduled time should overlap with availability from the DBA
The launchpad engineers request a merge from db-stable of *only* QA-ok commits 48 hours before the scheduled time. The db downtime then deploys just that merge revision and where possibly only does schema changes.
Other downtime requiring events (such as codehosting setup changes) have partial downtime scheduled as required.
DB-stable->devel merge imputs
Activities
Coordinator (LP Team lead)
Negotiate and confirm the dates and times for the main release window and a backup release window with the following groups. Refer to the the downtime schedule for the pre-scheduled dates and times (we have a process in place to ensure our release calendar does not conflict with Ubuntu; conflicts normally do not happen). The goal is to confirm that the scheduled downtime does not interrupt other teams at critical times, to ensure that the release window does not place undue stress or risk upon our own operations team, and renegotiate the dates and times if necessary. Note when scheduling that services on Launchpad can begin being paused up to half an hour before the rollout.
the stakeholder's list (private-canonical-launchpad-stakeholders@lists.launchpad.net).
the LOSAs (losas@canonical.com)
the DBA (Stuart Bishop <stuart.bishop@canonical.com>)
Let Matthew Revell <matthew.revell@canonical.com> know the time to announce it.
The downtime window is always 90 minutes; if less time is consumed, great. If more time is needed, we go back to the drawing board to figure out how to do it faster.
Re-announce downtime so it serves as a reminder on launchpadstatus account at least 4h before the actual rollout. You can do this yourself with the identi.ca login info.
Ensure that Matt Revell has a downtime announcement email ready for lp-announce. Again, make sure it's noted that some LP services (e.g. soyuz) can go offline temporarily up to half an hour before the rollout.
Engineering responsibilities
- All QA for db changes must include checking that the aggregate database time is within budget. To find out how long the database updates will take to deploy on production, double the aggregate time from staging and add 10 minutes. Grep for lines like "2208-30-0 applied just now in 70.5 seconds"in devpad:/x/launchpad.net-logs/staging/sourcherry/2011-*-staging_restore.log
- If the aggregate time is too large, either merge less than all the possible revisions, or back out the problem revision. This is part of qaing on db-stable.
Ask losas to merge db-stable rev XXX to devel and put PQM into RC mode. ('on prae as pqm cd /home/pqm/archives/rocketfuel/launchpad/devel; bzr update; bzr revert; bzr merge -r 10381 lp:~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/db-stable; bzr commit -m "Merge db-stable 10381." ; bzr push lp:~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/devel. If there are conflicts a developer should reproduce the merge and tell the LOSA how to resolve them.
- After buildbot blesses the merge ask LOSA to do the upgrade to qastaging ('refresh the qastaging tree on sourcherry, run normal upgrade scripts there')
While in RC mode:
Anyone can land 'release-critical' branches on devel that contain changes that would prevent the deployment from succeeding. This include fix or reversal for items marked qa-bad. Use [release-critical=<you>] in the PQM commit message.
A good rule of thumb to apply is: Does landing this change will save us from handling an incident during or shortly after the deployment? In the affirmative, land it!
For all other changes (features that would be delayed, nice to have fixes, annoyances to user, etc.) approval is required from either the project lead, technical architect or product strategist.
- Ask losas to take PQM out of RC mode once verifying that qastaging is working well (e.g. re-qa all the schema changes included in the merge).
Update the #launchpad-dev topic to state 'PQM in RC mode' and then reverse it.
Make sure all the cowboys listed on LaunchpadProductionStatus are either already landed or are added to the 'unusual rollout requirements' on that same page, so that the LOSAs will re-apply the cowboys after the rollout. It is definitely preferable not to re-apply cowboys, so it's a good idea to track down who hasn't landed a permanent fix yet.
- If some unexpected problems are encountered during the roll-out and these put the roll-out schedule off-track by more than 30 minutes, and it can be aborted, then it should be aborted. In that case:
- Identify the source of the problem and come up with a best estimate on how soon it can be fixed.
- Determine when the next attempt should be undertaken (usually: the backup window) and make sure it is announced. Give at least 24 hours of advance warning (because the readonly replica takes 24 hours to restore).
After the roll-out
- Immediately after the roll-out, examine the site for problems. For example, ensure CSS loads properly, all external links on the front page are reachable, etc.
Announce on launchpadstatus that the release is done.
Announce any post-roll out issues on lauchpadstatus as they are discovered. Create incident reports for them. (Following the Launchpad/PolicyandProcess/Announcements/IncidentProcess).
Database Patches
- If the qa-ok of a patch merged to devel was faulty and a fix is needed, this shouldn't impact the downtime - if it will, the entire thing should just be backed out.
References
SpuriousFailures -- useful for diagnosing last-minute build failures
