PMM from Docker to .deb and AMI

How discussed on Highload++, after months I will come back to this topic, how it is on the progress primes to porting PMM to a compiled deb-package or at least a AMI for easily use for a starter, who do not like to fight against dockers (All our team hate docker, sorry).

Big greetings from Sankt-Petersburg =)

На конференции Хайлоада мы с вами обсуждали портацию ПММ сервера из докера в идеальной версии в готовый компилированный деб-пакет (да, я видел, что там много зависимостей, но их же можно тоже подтягивать при инсталяции автоматом), ну а если совсем не вариант, то хотя бы готовый AMI слепок для амазона (в идеальном мире на Дебиане). Насколько я помню Пётр сказал, что таск такой либо уже был озвучен, либо будет озвучен после конферанции и надо будет подождать неесколько месяцев для обкатки. Можно надеятся на то, что это случится?

Hi Kote :slight_smile:

You can find Beta images on this link:
https://www.percona.com/blog/2017/02…now-available/

But you can wait for one day and get GA images

Sounds very interested, but can you say how long we need to wait? ca.?

Thanks for AMIs. But you maybe need to do some disclaimer about costs. I have looked at storages, that you have choose, but my colleague do not has do it. I understand, that on highload PMM need some power, but here a little calculation for EBS:

(Location Ireland)
400GB on General SSD, give us 1200 standard IOPS + burst mode up to 3000 IOPS = 45$/m
400GB on provisioned SSD with 5000 reserved IOPS = 415$ в месяц

For testing purposes is it a little too big for some projects.

PMM Server v1.1.1 images was released in 12 hours after my previous post.
You can find AMI IDs on this page https://www.percona.com/doc/percona-monitoring-and-management/deploy/server/ami.html

two weeks ago it was impossible to change EBS type, capacity and performance of EBS storage.
So we had dilemma:

  • create small storage which size and performance is not enough for all our customers
  • create expensive storage.
    I think it is bad idea to force PMM users to run migration from small EBS to large EBS manually.
    We choose second option because our users shouldn’t have bad experience due to very small defaults.

Now situation different - AWS allow to change EBS Type, size and performance - https://aws.amazon.com/ru/about-aws/whats-new/2017/02/amazon-elastic-block-store-amazon-ebs-enables-live-volume-modifications-with-elastic-volumes/
I created the ticket for change EBS volume size - https://jira.percona.com/browse/PMM-625