Skip to content

Use Docker 29 on 2024.1 Caracal#2175

Merged
priteau merged 1 commit intostackhpc/2024.1from
docker-29
Feb 25, 2026
Merged

Use Docker 29 on 2024.1 Caracal#2175
priteau merged 1 commit intostackhpc/2024.1from
docker-29

Conversation

@priteau
Copy link
Member

@priteau priteau commented Feb 24, 2026

Docker can be updated to version 29 using a package update. We risk downgrading to 28 when running kayobe overcloud host configure, which might be worse than the upgrade from 28 to 29.

Revert "limit docker-ce to 28 on Caracal"

This reverts commit 18027ca.

Revert "Fix Docker version check"

This reverts commit 01de41a.

Docker can be updated to version 29 using a package update. We risk
downgrading to 28 when running `kayobe overcloud host configure`, which
might be worse than the upgrade from 28 to 29.

Revert "limit docker-ce to 28 on Caracal"

This reverts commit 18027ca.

Revert "Fix Docker version check"

This reverts commit 01de41a.
@priteau priteau self-assigned this Feb 24, 2026
@priteau priteau requested a review from a team as a code owner February 24, 2026 16:27
Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request updates the configuration to allow using Docker version 29 on Caracal. The changes involve removing the explicit version pinning for Docker packages, which previously limited it to version 28, and updating the test configuration to accept Docker versions up to 30.0 (exclusive). The changes are consistent with the goal of the pull request and appear correct. I have no further suggestions.

Copy link
Contributor

@elelaysh elelaysh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, it's simpler than using versionlock to keep docker 28, that we would need to lift at a later upgrade

@Alex-Welsh
Copy link
Member

Why did we limit it in the first place? I was probably told before but have forgotten

@elelaysh
Copy link
Contributor

Why did we limit it in the first place? I was probably told before but have forgotten

We have been seeing issues where OVS containers failed to fully delete: the container is gone from the docker ps -a output but still running in the background. This leads to PID conflicts with the new containers launched by kolla-ansible.

@Alex-Welsh
Copy link
Member

Why did we limit it in the first place? I was probably told before but have forgotten

We have been seeing issues where OVS containers failed to fully delete: the container is gone from the docker ps -a output but still running in the background. This leads to PID conflicts with the new containers launched by kolla-ansible.

And we're confident the error is gone?

@priteau
Copy link
Member Author

priteau commented Feb 25, 2026

Why did we limit it in the first place? I was probably told before but have forgotten

We have been seeing issues where OVS containers failed to fully delete: the container is gone from the docker ps -a output but still running in the background. This leads to PID conflicts with the new containers launched by kolla-ansible.

And we're confident the error is gone?

Not 100% sure but I haven't seen issues when updating to Docker 29 in another deployment.

@priteau priteau merged commit 73fbca4 into stackhpc/2024.1 Feb 25, 2026
44 of 45 checks passed
@priteau priteau deleted the docker-29 branch February 25, 2026 11:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants