| *** mhen_ is now known as mhen | 01:58 | |
| jbernard | #startmeeting cinder | 14:01 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Wed Oct 9 14:01:47 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is jbernard. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:01 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:01 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'cinder' | 14:01 |
| jbernard | #topic roll call | 14:01 |
| Sai | o/ | 14:02 |
| jbernard | o/ | 14:02 |
| jbernard | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-epoxy-meetings | 14:02 |
| eharney | o7 | 14:02 |
| jungleboyj | o/ | 14:02 |
| jbernard | ^ new for epoxy | 14:02 |
| whoami-rajat | hi | 14:03 |
| ganso | o/ | 14:03 |
| jbernard | ok | 14:05 |
| jbernard | #topic annoucements | 14:05 |
| jbernard | welcome everyone | 14:05 |
| jbernard | we are about to start the epoxy cycle | 14:06 |
| jbernard | the meeting minutes/outline link has been updated | 14:06 |
| jbernard | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-epoxy-meetings | 14:06 |
| jbernard | here is the project schedule for this cycle | 14:07 |
| jbernard | #link https://releases.openstack.org/epoxy/schedule.html | 14:07 |
| jbernard | in 2 weeks we have our virtual PTG | 14:07 |
| jbernard | the etherpad for this to collect ideas is | 14:07 |
| whoami-rajat | congratulations jbernard for being re-elected as PTL! | 14:07 |
| jbernard | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/epoxy-ptg-cinder | 14:07 |
| jbernard | whoami-rajat: thanks! | 14:07 |
| jbernard | it was a tight race :) | 14:08 |
| whoami-rajat | :D | 14:08 |
| whoami-rajat | someone on the ML wanted to discuss a new driver and a new interface for drivers | 14:08 |
| whoami-rajat | i redirected them to the epoxy PTG etherpad | 14:09 |
| jbernard | we have a few cross-project interactions coming up for the ptg | 14:09 |
| jbernard | whoami-rajat: perfect | 14:09 |
| jungleboyj | jbernard: Thank you for taking it on again! | 14:09 |
| whoami-rajat | i think it would be a good idea to mention the date and time for cinder PTG so people can schedule things accordingly | 14:09 |
| whoami-rajat | i mean on the same etherpad | 14:09 |
| jungleboyj | ++ | 14:09 |
| jbernard | will do, i need to get the meta information on there | 14:10 |
| whoami-rajat | +1 | 14:10 |
| jbernard | and also the "room" reservation and bot manipulation stuff | 14:10 |
| jbernard | #action jbernard, update ptg pad, foundation ptg room stuff | 14:10 |
| jbernard | we've been invited to discuss the horizon feature gap list | 14:11 |
| jbernard | at the ptg | 14:12 |
| jbernard | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/horizon-feature-gap | 14:12 |
| jbernard | with respect to the ptg schedule, we generally have from tuesday to friday | 14:13 |
| jbernard | last cycle we met starting at 13:00 UTC | 14:13 |
| jbernard | for a couple of hours | 14:13 |
| jbernard | and I think friday turned into a bug/code review day | 14:14 |
| jbernard | this will similar, I do have an appointment tuesday morning, so I'll either shift the start time slightly or jump on a bit late that day | 14:14 |
| jbernard | I'm going to try to have a tentive plan to facilitate a discussion on the removal of eventlet (yes, it's that time) | 14:15 |
| jbernard | and I'm working on trying pick up on Pete's backup encryption work from last cycle, so that doesn't get left behind | 14:16 |
| jbernard | it's worth noting that Gorka has changed groups within redhat recently, so his availability will be very limited (if more than none) going forward | 14:17 |
| jbernard | Gorka has made many significant contributions to the project, his work, knowledge, and guidance will be very much missed | 14:18 |
| whoami-rajat | ++ | 14:18 |
| whoami-rajat | we all will miss him this time | 14:18 |
| jbernard | and it also means that we need to keep brick in mind as we're allocating time for patch review and maintaince | 14:19 |
| jbernard | (more than usual perhaps) as there is one less pair of eyes there now | 14:19 |
| tobias-urdin | is https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/epoxy-ptg-cinder the official ptg pad? https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/oct2024-ptg-cinder is linked on ptg.opendev.org and has some points already added | 14:19 |
| jbernard | tobias-urdin: ahh, thank you very much for pointing that out | 14:20 |
| jbernard | our working version is https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/epoxy-ptg-cinder (this is the same format as last cycle) | 14:20 |
| whoami-rajat | wow, there are a bunch of topics added there | 14:20 |
| jbernard | ill update the opendev link and combine the contents | 14:20 |
| jbernard | good catch! i was worried we didn't have much to discuss lol | 14:21 |
| tobias-urdin | cool, thanks! | 14:21 |
| * jbernard facepalm | 14:21 | |
| jbernard | that's all for annoucements | 14:22 |
| jbernard | #topic bug discussion | 14:23 |
| jbernard | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2083061 | 14:23 |
| jbernard | ganso: ^ you're up | 14:23 |
| ganso | jbernard: thanks! | 14:23 |
| ganso | hello! so we've started discussing that bug in the channel 2 weeks ago | 14:23 |
| ganso | and we decided it was better to discuss in a meeting | 14:23 |
| ganso | basically we need to evaluate whether it is better to patch the stable branches directly with a 1-liner retry, or backport a bigger patch | 14:24 |
| ganso | eharney has more knowledge of the big patch | 14:24 |
| ganso | which is this one: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/835384 | 14:24 |
| ganso | it adds a new config option, and someone had mentioned that apparently it has some upgrade impact | 14:25 |
| ganso | the big patch fixes more issues than the one I am discussing though. To be honest, I am more interested in the specific issue. If we conclude that the impact is low is may be a better option to backport the big one and fix more issues in the stable branches, that is good as well. I am just worried about the impact | 14:26 |
| ganso | and risk | 14:26 |
| jbernard | yes, generally we try to avoid backporting things classified as features or containing config changes if possible | 14:27 |
| eharney | it's not obvious to me why adding a retry on ImageNotFound works | 14:27 |
| ganso | eharney: it is a race condition. When deleting the parent and the child at the same time, the child checks for the parent | 14:27 |
| ganso | but the parent gets renamed upon deletion, so there is a window of opportunity where the code doesn't find the parent | 14:27 |
| jbernard | do we have a link to the one-liner? is that posted? | 14:28 |
| eharney | ah hah, and we don't have a lock or anything to serialize multiple delete operations that could affect each other | 14:28 |
| ganso | eharney: if the code is retried, then it finds it | 14:28 |
| ganso | eharney: I don't think we can have a good lock for this given it can happen in a HA environment | 14:28 |
| eharney | yeah, i wasn't proposing we should have one, better to not | 14:28 |
| ganso | eharney: like, 3 cinder-volume services running in parallel processing the deletes at the same time | 14:28 |
| ganso | jbernard: no it is not proposed, but it is described in the LP | 14:29 |
| ganso | jbernard: it is item (b) | 14:30 |
| jbernard | how successful was the proper patch (https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/835384)? have we seen any regressions or need for followup changes? | 14:30 |
| eharney | there is a follow-up to add an option for those who want to stick w/ the old behavior | 14:30 |
| eharney | (it fell pretty far back into my "review this eventually" queue but seems fine in concept) | 14:31 |
| ganso | eharney: hmmm this complicates things a bit if there are advantages to the old behavior, and a follow-up that we might want to backport as well if we do this one | 14:32 |
| eharney | i think we don't really want to support the old behavior, the submitter was concerned about expansion of storage usage etc in certain cases | 14:33 |
| jbernard | my concern with a one-liner is that it wouldn't apply to master, it would be something we only carry for stable branches | 14:33 |
| ganso | jbernard: yes, that's the big disadvantage | 14:33 |
| whoami-rajat | the thing about the one-liner is it only focuses on one of the many issues that eharney has addressed in his patch, even if we go that route, we can have another bug report with another issue that needs patching in stable branches | 14:34 |
| whoami-rajat | i feel it is best to address this the right way to avoid future issues in older/stable branches | 14:34 |
| whoami-rajat | my only concern with the RBD fix patch is the introduction of the config options, if we have checked that the options have safe default values and won't affect upgrade, I'm up for backporting it | 14:35 |
| jbernard | i tend to agree | 14:36 |
| jbernard | eharney: what are your thoughts? | 14:36 |
| eharney | well the big fix is already in caracal, are we just wanting it in bobcat or also antelope (right before it closes)? | 14:37 |
| ganso | jbernard: my understanding from reading the patch is that the config option has a godo default and the upgrade impact is not from the config option. I don't know what the upgrade impact that was raised in the previous discussion is from | 14:37 |
| ganso | eharney: upstream backports yes, but I'm interested in backporting it further downstream to yoga | 14:38 |
| ganso | eharney: I've tested for conflicts cherry-picking it as far back as yoga, and yoga had some conflicts | 14:38 |
| ganso | *only yoga had some conflicts | 14:39 |
| eharney | the other upgrade impact is that clone v2 image support should be enabled on the cluster (minimum client compat mimic) | 14:40 |
| eharney | it's not a hard requirement but is what we test and advise using | 14:40 |
| jbernard | ganso: pre-antelope releases are unmaintained, they will require a different approach | 14:41 |
| ganso | eharney: ok, mimic is quite old and we could assume it is quite unlikely someone is using mimic with yoga | 14:42 |
| jbernard | ganso: assuming the patch can apply cleanly and there are no other techincal issues | 14:42 |
| jbernard | i think we have agreement on backport up to antelope, at the least | 14:43 |
| ganso | jbernard: it doesn't apply cleanly to yoga, but we typically don't push all downstream backports to unmaintained branches | 14:43 |
| jbernard | ganso: unmaintained is under a different team for review and inclusion | 14:44 |
| ganso | jbernard: hmmm maybe I am unfamiliar with the advantages of the unmaintained branches | 14:45 |
| ganso | jbernard: AFAIK there isn't CI testing or tags anymore | 14:45 |
| jbernard | ganso: that's correct, and the unmaintained group is not the cinder cores - so we cannot review and merge as we do for master and active stable branches | 14:46 |
| jbernard | eharney: are you willing to post those backports? | 14:47 |
| jbernard | eharney: for B and A | 14:47 |
| whoami-rajat | wouldn't it be helpful if a non-core proposed the backport so cores can vote? just a suggestion | 14:48 |
| jbernard | oh, that's clever ;) | 14:48 |
| ganso | jbernard: yeah. Based on those facts they haven't provided any meaningful value (as far as I am aware) for delivering bugfixes to people still running old versions, such as yoga, so we backport downstream and test it downstream as much as we can | 14:48 |
| eharney | not sure, i think we also have to look at devstack-plugin-ceph etc and see if the jobs will test it correctly w/o some changes | 14:48 |
| jbernard | ganso: that may be where this one falls as well | 14:49 |
| ganso | whoami-rajat: yea I would propose the backport. I am happy to drive it and make sure whatever we agree can be backported as far back. I would be a shame if I end up finding out that it doesn't work in Yoga though | 14:49 |
| ganso | s/I would be a shame/it would be a shame | 14:49 |
| jbernard | ok, lets get the backports up so that devstack-plugin-ceph can weigh in | 14:49 |
| jbernard | and then we can circle back with data and make a final call | 14:49 |
| ganso | jbernard: sounds good, thanks! | 14:50 |
| jbernard | #action ganso to backport rbd flattening and report back in future meeting | 14:50 |
| jbernard | #topic open discussion | 14:51 |
| ganso | thanks everyone | 14:51 |
| ganso | it was a good discussion to assess the risk | 14:51 |
| whoami-rajat | thanks ganso for driving it! | 14:51 |
| jbernard | yes, thanks ganso | 14:51 |
| eharney | re: rbd i think we also have a change open somewhere to enable trash purge scheduling in CI which is needed for optimal testing | 14:55 |
| jbernard | that's a good point | 14:55 |
| eharney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/919539 (it needs a re-work) | 14:55 |
| jbernard | ill summarize this all in the etherpad | 14:55 |
| jbernard | thanks eharney | 14:56 |
| jbernard | last call | 14:58 |
| jbernard | ok, thanks everyone! | 14:59 |
| jbernard | #endmeeting | 14:59 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Wed Oct 9 14:59:07 2024 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 14:59 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2024/cinder.2024-10-09-14.01.html | 14:59 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2024/cinder.2024-10-09-14.01.txt | 14:59 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2024/cinder.2024-10-09-14.01.log.html | 14:59 |
| jungleboyj | Thank you! | 14:59 |
| whoami-rajat | thanks everyone! | 14:59 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!