Monday, 2015-04-27

« Sunday, 2015-04-26 Index Tuesday, 2015-04-28 »
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC00:20
*** dmorita has joined #openstack-rally00:29
*** jjmb1 has joined #openstack-rally00:45
*** jjmb has quit IRC00:46
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-rally00:56
*** ilbot3 has quit IRC01:45
*** ilbot3 has joined #openstack-rally01:47
*** baker has joined #openstack-rally02:37
*** baker has quit IRC03:23
*** baker has joined #openstack-rally03:27
*** rdas has joined #openstack-rally03:34
*** baker has quit IRC03:44
*** baker has joined #openstack-rally03:46
*** baker has quit IRC03:47
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally03:51
*** exploreshaifali has joined #openstack-rally04:09
*** davideagnello has joined #openstack-rally04:24
*** davideagnello has quit IRC04:28
*** tfreger has joined #openstack-rally04:34
*** coolsvap|afk is now known as coolsvap04:47
*** yfried__ has quit IRC04:56
*** exploreshaifali has quit IRC05:14
*** pradeep has joined #openstack-rally05:19
*** subscope_ has joined #openstack-rally05:30
*** subscope_ has quit IRC05:31
*** rdas_ has joined #openstack-rally05:41
*** rdas_ has quit IRC05:43
*** rdas has quit IRC05:43
*** rdas_ has joined #openstack-rally05:48
*** meteorfox has quit IRC05:51
*** meteorfox has joined #openstack-rally05:51
*** tfreger has quit IRC06:02
*** tfreger has joined #openstack-rally06:02
*** kiran-r has joined #openstack-rally06:03
*** tfreger has quit IRC06:05
*** tfreger has joined #openstack-rally06:08
*** tfreger has quit IRC06:10
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-rally06:24
*** e0ne has quit IRC06:28
*** neeti has joined #openstack-rally06:32
*** yfried__ has joined #openstack-rally06:36
*** nkhare has joined #openstack-rally06:50
*** anshul has joined #openstack-rally06:59
*** gema has joined #openstack-rally07:12
*** gema has quit IRC07:12
*** gema has joined #openstack-rally07:13
*** pbandzi has joined #openstack-rally07:22
*** pbandzi is now known as 21WABZ53K07:25
*** pbandzi has joined #openstack-rally07:25
*** pbandzi has quit IRC07:25
*** ibiris_away is now known as ibiris07:31
*** arxcruz has joined #openstack-rally07:53
yfried__meteorfox: ping07:57
*** vaidy_ril has quit IRC07:58
*** vaidy has joined #openstack-rally07:59
*** amaretskiy has joined #openstack-rally08:03
*** fhubik has joined #openstack-rally08:04
*** exploreshaifali has joined #openstack-rally08:07
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC08:13
*** karimb has joined #openstack-rally08:13
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-rally08:16
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat08:25
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk08:39
*** tosky has joined #openstack-rally08:48
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik08:54
*** aix has joined #openstack-rally08:58
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-rally08:59
*** yingjun has joined #openstack-rally09:00
openstackgerritNikita Konovalov proposed openstack/rally: [Sahara] Split EDP context  https://review.openstack.org/17768209:04
openstackgerritsvasheka proposed openstack/rally: Add keystone benchmark scenarios for roles  https://review.openstack.org/16540909:05
openstackgerritLi Yingjun proposed openstack/rally: Set default value for updated_at for task  https://review.openstack.org/17658309:07
*** e0ne has quit IRC09:10
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-rally09:13
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk09:25
openstackgerritAndrey Kurilin proposed openstack/rally: Adding FunctionalMixin class  https://review.openstack.org/14683809:25
*** dmellado has quit IRC09:28
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik09:29
*** yingjun has quit IRC09:32
openstackgerritMerged openstack/rally: Fix instance_dd_tests.sh always reading 1MiB  https://review.openstack.org/17744709:33
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk09:44
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik09:46
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat09:55
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat10:02
*** yfried__ is now known as yfried|afk10:03
*** yfried|afk is now known as yfried__10:06
openstackgerritNikita Konovalov proposed openstack/rally: [Sahara] Split EDP context  https://review.openstack.org/17768210:07
openstackgerritNikita Konovalov proposed openstack/rally: [Sahara] Improve Image context  https://review.openstack.org/16685910:15
*** tfreger has joined #openstack-rally10:16
openstackgerritNikita Konovalov proposed openstack/rally: [Sahara] Improve Image context  https://review.openstack.org/16685910:16
openstackgerritNikita Konovalov proposed openstack/rally: [Sahara] Split EDP context  https://review.openstack.org/17768210:17
*** karimb has quit IRC10:18
openstackgerritAlexander Gubanov proposed openstack/rally: Adds Nova floating IPs bulk tests  https://review.openstack.org/16805410:24
openstackgerritVitaly Gusev proposed openstack/rally: [Ceilometer] Add scenarios for resources and samples  https://review.openstack.org/16509210:32
*** karimb has joined #openstack-rally10:32
*** karimb has quit IRC10:33
*** karimb has joined #openstack-rally10:37
yfried__amaretskiy: do you have a few min? re https://review.openstack.org/#/c/172831/5/doc/specs/in-progress/os_services.rst,cm10:39
amaretskiyyfried__ hi10:40
amaretskiyyes10:40
yfried__did you see my comment?10:40
yfried__amaretskiy: ^?10:45
amaretskiyyes10:45
amaretskiyI've posted my comment about atomic actions10:46
amaretskiyright now10:46
amaretskiywe can discuss some points here10:46
yfried__amaretskiy: so yeah, I think we are on the same page re atomic actions10:47
yfried__amaretskiy: it's simpler when they are part of utils, but sometimes you want more control on the atomic actions (enable/disable them) or on parts of it, without duplicating code10:48
yfried__amaretskiy: on the other hand, we might want to use atomic actions in contexts10:48
amaretskiycontrol over atomic actions must beflexible (no hardcoded names at all, on/off)10:48
yfried__amaretskiy: yeah. but should it be part of this spec?10:49
yfried__amaretskiy: seems like it's a different issue that needs better planning10:50
amaretskiyI think that this spec should say where atomic actions should be10:50
amaretskiyif in scenarios, that nothing else should be added to spec10:50
amaretskiyif somewhere elese - then we must describe how flexibility is reached10:50
amaretskiycurrently atomic actions is important part of utils so we have to make a decision10:51
yfried__then  you want to remove all references to atomic action from utils modules (that will be changed to services)?10:51
amaretskiyyes, this is my opinion10:51
amaretskiyin other case, we can continue of using utils - just move the main code to services but keep atomic actions10:52
amaretskiymy opinion is that atomic actions should NOT be in sevices10:52
yfried__amaretskiy: I'm not sure about that. but this could be discussed later.10:53
*** softCloud has joined #openstack-rally10:53
amaretskiyokay, if you think that we can put atomic actions into services, then some code examples are required - how this can work10:54
yfried__amaretskiy: assuming we agree on the 1st option - the spec should say that part of refactoring would be removing all atomic actions from utils10:54
amaretskiyI'm not sure about that10:54
*** karimb has quit IRC10:54
amaretskiythe main problem with utils is that they are bound to scenario, so it is strange to call them in context/cleanup/etc10:56
amaretskiyrelated problem is if we call utils from non-scenario, then we also run hardcoded atomic actions10:56
yfried__amaretskiy: the spec is about changing "utils" to services and unbounding them from scenarios10:56
amaretskiyyes10:57
yfried__amaretskiy: that's why I'm saying we need to remove atomic actions from utils10:57
amaretskiyokay10:57
amaretskiyremove them from utils10:57
amaretskiyand place where?10:57
yfried__amaretskiy: scenarios - as you suggested10:57
amaretskiyI agree with you :)10:58
amaretskiyI believe others will agree too10:58
yfried__amaretskiy: would you like to write a different spec about enhancing atomic actions?10:58
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk10:59
yfried__meteorfox: here?10:59
amaretskiyI would like to do that, but this will not be soon (have a lot of work)10:59
yfried__amaretskiy: :)10:59
*** yfried has joined #openstack-rally11:06
*** yfried__ has quit IRC11:07
*** e0ne is now known as e0ne_11:07
*** e0ne_ is now known as e0ne11:07
*** karimb has joined #openstack-rally11:09
*** e0ne is now known as e0ne_11:19
*** cdent has joined #openstack-rally11:23
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat11:27
*** coolsvap is now known as coolsvap|afk11:27
*** e0ne_ has quit IRC11:29
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat11:31
openstackgerritAlexander Gubanov proposed openstack/rally: Adds Nova floating IPs bulk tests  https://review.openstack.org/16805411:31
openstackgerritOleh Anufriiev proposed openstack/rally: Removed task validation from api.Task.start  https://review.openstack.org/15889911:42
*** pradeep has quit IRC11:44
*** pboldin has joined #openstack-rally11:44
pboldinyfried: hi. Can you please solve our dilemma https://review.openstack.org/#/c/174454/ ?11:45
pboldinyfried: while it is obviously that unit-test is for units I'm not sure of what should I think of as a unit here11:45
yfriedpboldin: I'm out of loop with this patch. what is the question?11:47
pboldinyfried: there is a small class CatcherHandler with a simply set of methods. should I cover these with unit-tests?11:47
*** mwagner_lap has quit IRC11:48
pboldinyfried: I would rather keep the tests as they are, because I think of a catcher as a single unit that is simply enough to be tested as a whole11:49
*** dmorita has quit IRC11:49
yfriedpboldin: I wanted to talk to you about this patch anyway11:52
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik11:52
pboldinyfried: oh, great11:52
yfriedpboldin: but re tests11:52
*** panbalag has joined #openstack-rally11:52
panbalagandreykurilin, Hi11:52
yfriedpboldin: I don't really like the unittests we do with mocks, but it's part of the project policy to have everything covered by it, so I guess you have to comply11:53
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk11:53
pboldinyfried: then i would have to rewrite latter tests to use mocks11:53
yfriedpboldin: why?11:54
pboldinyfried: because it would be no longer a 'unit'11:54
yfriedpboldin: could you hold? I have to relocate my laptop so I'm gonna drop out of the channel11:54
pboldinyfried: ok11:54
panbalagandreykurilin, amaretskiy, I had replied to the comments in the spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/166487. Let me know if I you have any other questions.11:54
*** msdubov_ has joined #openstack-rally11:57
amaretskiypanbalag okay11:58
pboldinyfried: i think the simplest solution here is to move the CatcherHandler inside the LogCatcher but I'm unsure of py3 compatibility here11:58
yfriedpboldin: I'm back11:59
pboldinyfried: have you got the previous message?11:59
pboldinyfried:  i think the simplest solution here is to move the CatcherHandler inside the LogCatcher but I'm unsure of py3 compatibility here11:59
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-rally11:59
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat12:01
pboldinyfried: so?12:01
*** exploreshaifali has quit IRC12:01
* yfried looking at pboldin's patch12:02
*** yfried_ has joined #openstack-rally12:03
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat12:03
andreykurilinpanbalag: oh...I forgot to answer you:( sorry12:04
andreykurilinpanbalag: I'll write a comment now12:04
openstackgerritEvgeny Sikachev proposed openstack/rally: [Sahara] Split Data Sources context  https://review.openstack.org/17773212:04
yfried_pboldin: assuming LogCatcher is already covered by LogCatcherTestCase I don't understand why CatcherHandlerTestCase would cause LogCatcherTestCase to change12:05
pboldinyfried_: because splitting a CatcherHandlerTestCase would make a CatcherHandler a unit.12:05
andreykurilinpanbalog: btw, the most of statements from spec look good to me and for other cores, so you can start the implementation12:05
yfried_pboldin: but seems like your tests aren't unittests, but rather functional tests. shouldn't they go in functional tests tree?12:05
panbalagandreykurilin, Thanks12:06
pboldinyfried_ and this will make LogCatcherTestCase not a unit-test.12:06
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC12:06
*** yfried has quit IRC12:06
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-rally12:06
*** pboldin1 has joined #openstack-rally12:06
pboldin1yfried_: yes, they are not unit tests.12:07
yfried_pboldin1: so maybe move them to functional tests tree?12:07
pboldin1yfried_: well, i think that the code here is simply enough to be a 'unit' as a whole.12:07
openstackgerritEvgeny Sikachev proposed openstack/rally: [Sahara] Split Data Sources context  https://review.openstack.org/17773212:08
kiran-ryfried_: could you please share the procedure to commit to rally? :)12:08
yfried_kiran-r: procedure?12:08
pboldin1kiran-r: of what?12:08
kiran-rgit commit.12:08
kiran-ryfried_: git commit.12:08
yfried_kiran-r: git commit && git review12:08
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat12:09
yfried_pboldin1: my suggestion is to leave your test as is. it's a good test12:09
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat12:10
pboldin1yfried_: but to move it to functional tests?12:10
yfried_pboldin1: if you want. you don't have to12:10
pboldin1yfried_: so, could you please comment on this?12:10
pboldin1yfried_: i think we need to improve functional testing.12:10
*** pboldin has quit IRC12:10
pboldin1yfried_: the infrastructure there is not ready to accept these, there is only cli tests so far12:10
yfried_pboldin1: but if amaretskiy thinks you need unittests that test the different methods, then you should create simple and stupid tests that use mocks. that's the policy of Rally.12:11
pboldin1yfried_: so, you are unable to really decide and referencing the rally policies. I will have to wait for boris-42 then :-/12:12
yfried_pboldin1: you're gonna need Boris to give final judgement on such an issue and he's on vacation this week12:12
yfried_pboldin1: it's not that I'm unable to decide. the policies are there, and we have to follow them even if we don't agree12:12
yfried_pboldin1: sorry.12:13
pboldin1yfried_: you are unable to change the policies, i mean only that. ok, we will wait for boris12:13
yfried_pboldin1: I just think that writing the mocks would be quicker than waitingfor boris to come back, assuming he would agree with you12:13
pboldin1yfried_: well, my patches typically hang on reviews for some months and i can wait12:14
pboldin1yfried_: but lets talk about the patchset chain as a whole12:14
yfried_pboldin1: seems like this one should be ready to merge.12:14
yfried_pboldin1: I was gonna ask you about it. I'll try to ping you in 30min since I have a mtg12:15
pboldin1yfried_: okay12:15
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat12:15
yfried_pboldin1: could you please point to a patch in the chain that's using it?12:16
pboldin1yfried_: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177011/3/tests/unit/benchmark/scenarios/vm/test_utils.py,cm12:16
yfried_pboldin1: that's a unittest, not an actual scenario12:17
pboldin1yfried_: of course, this is a unit-test thing12:17
yfried_pboldin1: oh...12:17
yfried_pboldin1: so maybe it's a functional tests thing?12:18
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat12:18
yfried_pboldin1: it's supposed to test rally logs, right? not openstack logs12:18
pboldin1yfried_: to test logs. any type of.12:18
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat12:19
yfried_pboldin1: it can't intercept openstack logs if they aren't on the same node as rally, can it?12:19
pboldin1yfried_: it can intercept openstack logs only issued by clients used in rally12:19
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik12:20
pboldin1yfried_: so i think i will have to move all the existing functional tests to the `cli' directory12:22
pboldin1*subdir12:22
pboldin1yfried_: and then add a directory `log' adding my test in here12:22
yfried_pboldin1: agree12:23
yfried_d12:23
yfried_pboldin1: however, arxcruz is working on fucntional testing so maybe sync with him to make sure you aren't duplicating effort?12:23
pboldin1yfried_: well, that is why i prefer to leave the patch as is and only note it with TODO12:23
yfried_pboldin1: I have a more fundemental issue with your work here:12:24
pboldin1yfried_: i'm all ears12:24
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk12:25
yfried_pboldin1: I have no idea where it's going. I see 10 related patches and I'm gonna have to dive into them without knowing why logcatcher was created until I get to the 5th patch12:25
yfried_pboldin1: this seems like a blueprint with a short discription of the main goal would help to tie all of these togather12:26
pboldin1yfried_: https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1FQicnj6aIdbfYts9ofYdz0dUEf9zyssWqDjQR40h268/edit?pli=112:26
pboldin1yfried_: agreed12:26
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik12:27
yfried_pboldin1: ok so could you please create a lauchpad pb that only has 3 lines of discription and a link to this doc?12:28
pboldin1yfried_: i want to use this instead https://blueprints.launchpad.net/rally/+spec/benchmark-vms12:28
yfried_pboldin1: that way, you could have all your patches point to it, and gerrit will group them into a single branch12:29
yfried_pboldin1: is it related? haven't read it yet, but it seems like it's already tracking lot's of patches. we not just create a new one? only for tracking12:30
pboldin1yfried_: ok12:30
yfried_pboldin1: tnx. it would make it easier to review these patches it context. wouldn't you agree?12:31
pboldin1yfried_: well, mostly people are in context. but you a right12:31
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat12:32
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat12:33
yfried_pboldin1: also if you push this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177009/2 without dependency on logcatcher you should be able to merge it today12:35
pboldin1yfried_: i'm not in hurry12:36
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC12:37
yfried_pboldin1: me neither but I would like to merge simple stuff ASAP to clear the review queue12:37
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-rally12:37
pboldin1yfried_: okay, as you wish12:37
*** baker has joined #openstack-rally12:40
openstackgerritRoman Vasilets proposed openstack/rally: Add Http Request Scenario  https://review.openstack.org/11770512:47
*** dpaterson has joined #openstack-rally12:48
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk12:48
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat12:51
*** baker has quit IRC12:54
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik13:03
*** tfreger has quit IRC13:05
*** 21WABZ53K has quit IRC13:07
*** pbandzi has joined #openstack-rally13:08
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat13:12
yfried_pboldin1: looking at http://logs.openstack.org/54/174454/6/check/rally-coverage/344b847/cover/rally_common_log.html13:12
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat13:13
pboldin1yfried_: i'm writing unittests already13:13
pboldin1yfried_: and have filed a bug13:13
yfried_pboldin1: seems like shouldFlush is the only thing not covered13:13
pboldin1yfried_: there is a remedy against methodology fanatics13:13
pboldin1yfried_: https://bugs.launchpad.net/rally/+bug/144900913:13
openstackLaunchpad bug 1449009 in Rally "[unittest] unable to assert on deprecation warnings" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Pavel Boldin (pboldin)13:14
pboldin1yfried_: nevermind13:14
pboldin1yfried_: of course, because it is tested by the 'functional test' below13:14
yfried_pboldin1: not according to the code-coverage tool13:15
pboldin1yfried_: yeah, I don't know why 'shouldFlush' is not getting covered13:15
yfried_pboldin1: my point is13:15
yfried_pboldin1: I was gonna say, if we achieve 100% coverage on this, I don't care about the rules13:16
pboldin1yfried_: nope. rules are rules13:16
pboldin1yfried_: i'm going to follow the sh*t out of them13:16
yfried_pboldin1: but since we don't, and this is one of the methods in question, I can't +2 this13:16
pboldin1yfried_: i have rewrited this13:16
pboldin1yfried_: well, i believe that 'return False' method is incredible hard to understand13:17
pboldin1yfried_: so it just must be covered13:17
yfried_pboldin1: don't be like that :)13:19
pboldin1yfried_: it's not my, it's the rules13:19
pboldin1yfried_: i'm just complying with them being brain-removed instruction executor13:20
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC13:21
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-rally13:22
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat13:23
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat13:25
pboldin1yfried_: well, i have updated that https://review.openstack.org/#/c/174454/13:30
pboldin1yfried_: the only thing that is remaining (and it should be fixed imo) is that I don't mock the "in" operator.13:30
pboldin1yfried_: and don't test for it13:30
*** neeti has quit IRC13:31
ilyashakhathi ralliers!, do you have any plans to make plugins folder location configurable?13:32
yfried_pboldin1: why workflow -1?13:35
pboldin1yfried_: missing the 'in' mock testing13:35
pboldin1yfried_: is relying on the str.__contains__ good enough or should I remove that code?13:36
pboldin1yfried_: and i should have removed the non-unit test leaving the code essentially untested but in full compliance with 'rally policies'13:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Add command-dict option to specify command args  https://review.openstack.org/17701613:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Split validation.file_exists, allow `required' arg  https://review.openstack.org/17701013:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Introduce command-specifying dictionary  https://review.openstack.org/17701113:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Add `LogCatcher' context manager  https://review.openstack.org/17445413:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Introduce `valid_command' validator  https://review.openstack.org/17701213:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Extend `sshutils` with `put_file'  https://review.openstack.org/17701313:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Make `boot_runcommand_delete' accept command-dict  https://review.openstack.org/17701413:37
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Add command-dict option to upload a local command  https://review.openstack.org/17701513:37
yfried_pboldin1: you really didn't need the LogCatcherUnitTestCase if it's covered by LogCatcherTestCase IMO13:40
pboldin1yfried_: the policies are the policies. I don't need LogCatcherTestCase because it is not unit-test and does not belongs here.13:40
pboldin1yfried_: i just want to show you that policies are not covering 100% of possible future things.13:41
pboldin1yfried_: and always forcing them makes code worse sometimes.13:41
*** psd has joined #openstack-rally13:44
*** exploreshaifali has joined #openstack-rally13:45
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk13:46
*** flamebot has joined #openstack-rally13:49
*** BaQs has quit IRC13:49
*** BaQs has joined #openstack-rally13:50
yfried_andreykurilin: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177009/3 is ready to merge pending jenkins. could you please take a look? it passed previous verification and was just rebased13:51
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik13:51
yfried_msdubov_: ^13:51
yfried_meteorfox: around?13:54
*** mkoderer has quit IRC13:55
andreykurilinyfried_: ok, will check it now13:56
yfried_pboldin1: re https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177013/6 haven't read it yet, but should it be so far up that branch?13:56
pboldin1yfried_: it is logical to add this just before usage13:57
*** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-rally13:57
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat13:57
pboldin1yfried_: that's why 177009 was in the place it was13:57
pboldin1yfried_: but the answer is 'no'. yet people will ask 'why do you add this?' if it is far away from the usage13:57
*** mkoderer has joined #openstack-rally13:58
pboldin1yfried_: if you review it i can move it to the bottom of the chain13:58
yfried_pboldin1: it's still part of that topic/bp so they won't have more reasons to do so than before, but we could merge it faster and save you the rebase hassle13:58
pboldin1yfried_: well, it is not related to the blueprint. i will file an arg13:59
pboldin1*a bug13:59
yfried_[16:58] <pboldin1> yfried_: if you review it i can move it to the bottom of the chain13:59
yfried_pboldin1: ^ say that backwards and you got yourself a deal :)13:59
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat13:59
pboldin1yfried_: ok14:00
*** jjmb2 has joined #openstack-rally14:00
*** jjmb2 has quit IRC14:00
*** jjmb2 has joined #openstack-rally14:00
*** jjmb2 has quit IRC14:00
*** jjmb2 has joined #openstack-rally14:01
*** jjmb2 has joined #openstack-rally14:01
*** anshul has quit IRC14:01
*** ibiris is now known as ibiris_away14:01
*** jjmb1 has quit IRC14:02
*** ibiris_away is now known as ibiris14:03
openstackgerritIlya Shakhat proposed openstack/rally: Make plugins location configurable  https://review.openstack.org/17777314:04
*** nkhare has quit IRC14:05
*** exploreshaifali has quit IRC14:06
yfried_pboldin1: re https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177011/514:08
yfried_pboldin1: "Both local and inline scripts require specifying interpreter. " why not remote path as well?14:08
*** fhubik is now known as fhubik_afk14:08
pboldin1yfried_: remote path specifies a command, not a script. one should use shellbang to specify interpreter then14:11
yfried_pboldin1: yeah. understood it while reading the code. the doc is pretty good14:12
pboldin1yfried_: btw, that is the reason to use 'script_file' but 'local_path'. because we are opening file from a `script_file' but only using a path passing to the sftp14:13
*** fhubik_afk is now known as fhubik14:13
pboldin1yfried_: so, these mean different things and thus have different names14:13
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Add command-dict option to specify command args  https://review.openstack.org/17701614:14
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Split validation.file_exists, allow `required' arg  https://review.openstack.org/17701014:14
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Introduce command-specifying dictionary  https://review.openstack.org/17701114:14
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Add `LogCatcher' context manager  https://review.openstack.org/17445414:14
yfried_pboldin1: yeah.14:14
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Introduce `valid_command' validator  https://review.openstack.org/17701214:14
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Extend `sshutils' with `put_file'  https://review.openstack.org/17701314:14
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Make `boot_runcommand_delete' accept command-dict  https://review.openstack.org/17701414:14
openstackgerritPavel Boldin proposed openstack/rally: Add command-dict option to upload a local command  https://review.openstack.org/17701514:14
*** dmellado has joined #openstack-rally14:14
pboldin1yfried_: considering this: _file_access_ok14:15
pboldin1yfried_: we are not checking that the file is accessible, we are checking that the file access is ok with *given mode*14:16
yfried_pboldin1: ok14:16
pboldin1yfried_: so it checks a little more than accessibility of the file and thus named file_access_ok (should be file_access_mode_ok probably)14:17
yfried_pboldin1: or _check_file_access14:17
pboldin1yfried_: i don't like to start names with _check or any other verb. but _check favors an exception being raised inside the function14:18
pboldin1yfried_: but there is no common naming scheme in python for this afaik14:18
*** nkhare has joined #openstack-rally14:19
yfried_pboldin1: I'm not gonna -1 because of this name14:19
pboldin1yfried_: well, i'm just trying to think of naming convention :)14:20
*** pboldin has joined #openstack-rally14:23
*** pboldin1 has quit IRC14:23
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat14:23
*** igormarnat is now known as imarnat14:24
*** pboldin1 has joined #openstack-rally14:25
*** pboldin1 has joined #openstack-rally14:25
pboldin1yfried_: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177013/7 << done14:27
yfried_pboldin1: tnx14:27
* yfried_ reviewing14:27
*** pboldin has quit IRC14:27
*** imarnat is now known as igormarnat14:29
*** msdubov_ has quit IRC14:30
*** oanufriev1 has quit IRC14:37
*** dmellado has quit IRC14:42
*** rdas_ has quit IRC14:46
*** pradeep has joined #openstack-rally14:47
*** ibiris is now known as ibiris_away14:53
*** ibiris_away is now known as ibiris14:56
*** yfried_ is now known as yfried|afk15:00
*** fhubik has quit IRC15:06
*** yfried|afk is now known as yfried_15:07
*** arxcruz has quit IRC15:08
*** davideagnello has joined #openstack-rally15:09
*** aix has quit IRC15:09
openstackgerritCarlos L. Torres proposed openstack/rally: [report] Improve reports data and units  https://review.openstack.org/16103715:12
openstackgerritCarlos L. Torres proposed openstack/rally: [report] Improve reports data and units  https://review.openstack.org/16103715:13
*** davideagnello has quit IRC15:13
meteorfoxyfried_: I reverted the changes to mean() function. Please feel free to review ^^ whenever you have time. Thanks15:15
*** nkhare has quit IRC15:17
yfried_meteorfox: done. You better hope jenkins agrees with me :)15:18
meteorfoxyfried_: :) it should. thanks15:18
*** yfried_ has quit IRC15:22
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC15:32
*** Vishal__ has joined #openstack-rally15:34
Vishal__amaretskiy: Hi15:35
amaretskiyVishal__ hi15:35
Vishal__amaretskiy: tried giving userdata in the nova boot and list scenario..but it is not working15:36
amaretskiyVishal__ paste this to paste.openstack.org15:37
Vishal__amaretskiy: http://paste.openstack.org/show/208493/15:38
amaretskiyVishal__ also need paste for errors output15:39
Vishal__amaretskiy: there is no error in rally logs but the desired output was not there...just want to verify is the way I am providing the userdata parameter is correct?15:40
Vishal__amaretskiy: same shell script is working fine when I am doing nova boot manually while providing user_data15:41
*** tosky has quit IRC15:46
amaretskiyVishal__ I'm reading http://docs.openstack.org/developer/python-novaclient/ref/v2/servers.html15:49
amaretskiyuserdata – user data to pass to be exposed by the metadata server this can be a file type object as well or a string.15:49
amaretskiyVishal__ based on this doc I think that novaclient expects 1) file("path/to/file") or 2) string that represents file content, not its path15:50
amaretskiyIf I'm not mistaken, then there is only one choice for scenario arguments for now - using single-line script as userdata15:51
Vishal__amaretskiy: I had given path to file (as point 1) in the json file15:53
*** e0ne is now known as e0ne_15:53
amaretskiyVishal__ my dues is that should be file content instead15:53
amaretskiysince file("path") is not "path"15:54
*** e0ne_ is now known as e0ne15:54
openstackgerritMerged openstack/rally: Add create_and_upload_volume_to_image scenario to rally-neutron job  https://review.openstack.org/17242515:54
*** psd has quit IRC15:56
*** pradeep has quit IRC15:58
amaretskiyVishal__ sorry for a small mistake above16:01
amaretskiyfile object is actually result of open("path)16:01
amaretskiybut the idea is same16:01
Vishal__amaretskiy: yes it reads the contents and than send it to nova16:02
amaretskiyVishal__ currently, for nova scenarios there is no possibility to specify userdata as file path16:05
amaretskiyVishal__ so I believe this should work as inline script16:06
amaretskiyhowever there is similar implementation for vm scenarios: https://github.com/openstack/rally/blob/master/rally/benchmark/scenarios/vm/utils.py#L49-L5116:07
Vishal__amaretskiy: Yes but this one uses FIP to execute the script16:07
*** dmellado has joined #openstack-rally16:08
amaretskiyVishal__ I agree16:08
Vishal__amaretskiy: I specifically want to test metadata and snat functionality16:08
Vishal__amaretskiy: metadata through userdata and snat through the shell script16:08
amaretskiyVishal__ I think the only possible try is inline script, I hope this will work16:09
openstackgerritMerged openstack/rally: [Sahara] Fix the config descriptions  https://review.openstack.org/17632116:09
amaretskiyVishal__ yes, my mistake - metadata16:09
Vishal__amaretskiy: sorry not able to understand the inline concept properly...is it by specifying the contents of the script?16:10
amaretskiyexample:  "userdata": "echo \"hi there!\"; echo \"how are you?\""16:12
amaretskiymaybe it is possible to put \n instead of ; as commands delimiter16:13
amaretskiythe idea is put script in single line since JSON does not support multiline data16:13
*** pradeep has joined #openstack-rally16:13
Vishal__amaretskiy: Also why this path to file is not working...since novaClient is on the same machine as rally and it has the access to the path where the file is kept? Sorry if it is a dumb question16:13
Vishal__:)16:14
amaretskiypath is not transformed into file object because path is actually a str value, and it is specified to nova client  as-is16:15
kiran-rHello, I am unable to perform ¨git review¨ Here is the error I face http://paste.openstack.org/show/208539/16:15
kiran-rPlease help me16:15
amaretskiyrally does not transform userdata value into file object16:15
pboldin1https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177013/7 << review pls16:17
amaretskiykiran-r you should rebase your patches so there will be exactly one patch above master branch16:17
Vishal__amaretskiy: ok so after doing some code changes in rally I can make it work and pass the file object to the "servers.create" function of novaClient16:18
amaretskiyVishal__ yes, this is a reasonable idea, but you need a solution how to 100% differ string that represents path to file from small shell command16:20
amaretskiyVishal__ that was solved in vm scenarios by additional parameter `is_file'16:21
Vishal__amaretskiy: Thanks a lot...I feel in case of small shell command given in a single line we have to accomodate "#!/bin/sh"16:21
Vishal__amaretskiy: to tell cloud-init package to use bash for executing the line16:22
pboldin1amaretskiy: now, it was not16:22
pboldin1amaretskiy: *no16:22
amaretskiyVishal__, no, this will not work - script can be without she-bang, and it can include one command - path to some file16:22
pboldin1amaretskiy: check how it is implemented inb4 doing a statement.16:23
pboldin1amaretskiy: this is how the is_file implemented, actually16:24
Vishal__amaretskiy: ok will try16:24
pboldin1https://github.com/openstack/rally/blob/master/rally/benchmark/scenarios/vm/utils.py#L54-L63 <<16:24
pboldin1and this is wrong, because it hides away the command return16:25
pboldin1and still requires 'interpreter' to be specified16:25
pboldin1not to say this unnecessary spawns a process16:27
pboldin1Vishal__: "#!/bin/sh" is not using bash16:28
openstackgerritmaplelabs proposed openstack/rally: LoadBalancer functionality with unit tests.  https://review.openstack.org/17786516:39
*** karimb has quit IRC16:40
*** apal has quit IRC16:59
*** logan2 has quit IRC17:05
*** davideagnello has joined #openstack-rally17:05
*** exploreshaifali has joined #openstack-rally17:10
openstackgerritAlexander Maretskiy proposed openstack/rally: [Clients] Add function osclients.register  https://review.openstack.org/17788417:12
*** anshul has joined #openstack-rally17:14
*** amaretskiy has quit IRC17:17
*** kiran-r has quit IRC17:19
*** exploreshaifali has quit IRC17:20
*** e0ne has quit IRC17:21
openstackgerritPradeep K Surisetty proposed openstack/rally: Add Ceilometer list samples  https://review.openstack.org/17789017:27
*** yfried_ has joined #openstack-rally17:30
*** Vishal__ has quit IRC17:41
*** pboldin1 has left #openstack-rally17:51
*** cdent has quit IRC17:51
*** harlowja_away is now known as harlowja_17:52
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally17:56
*** kiran-r has joined #openstack-rally18:04
*** davideagnello has quit IRC18:10
*** davideagnello has joined #openstack-rally18:12
*** anshul has quit IRC18:17
*** kiran-r has quit IRC18:29
*** exploreshaifali has joined #openstack-rally18:30
*** stpierre has joined #openstack-rally18:36
*** tfreger has joined #openstack-rally18:42
openstackgerritPradeep K Surisetty proposed openstack/rally: Add Ceilometer list samples  https://review.openstack.org/17789018:46
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-rally18:46
*** softCloud1 has joined #openstack-rally19:00
*** softCloud has quit IRC19:01
*** davideagnello has quit IRC19:04
*** davideagnello has joined #openstack-rally19:06
*** pradeep has quit IRC19:12
meteorfoxandreykurilin:  can you review this too, please? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161037/19:19
*** msdubov_ has joined #openstack-rally19:36
*** exploreshaifali has quit IRC19:39
*** msdubov_ has quit IRC19:41
*** exploreshaifali has joined #openstack-rally19:41
*** ibiris is now known as ibiris_away19:45
openstackgerritMerged openstack/rally: Fix `sshutils' to execute commands with args  https://review.openstack.org/17700919:49
*** echoingu_ has joined #openstack-rally20:06
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC20:08
*** echoingu_ has quit IRC20:20
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally20:21
*** exploreshaifali has quit IRC20:22
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC20:23
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally20:23
*** tfreger has quit IRC20:28
*** yfried_ is now known as yfried|afk20:30
*** mwagner_lap has quit IRC20:37
*** echoingu_ has joined #openstack-rally20:40
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC20:43
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally20:45
*** echoingu_ has quit IRC20:49
*** yfried|afk is now known as yfried_20:50
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC20:50
*** turul has joined #openstack-rally20:51
*** turul is now known as afazekas20:52
*** karimb has joined #openstack-rally20:59
*** yfried_ is now known as yfried|afk21:00
*** karimb has quit IRC21:07
openstackgerritChris St. Pierre proposed openstack/rally: Add Nova scenario to boot and associate a floating IP  https://review.openstack.org/17796821:08
openstackgerritChris St. Pierre proposed openstack/rally: Add Nova scenario to boot and associate a floating IP  https://review.openstack.org/17796821:16
*** stpierre has quit IRC21:45
*** e0ne has quit IRC22:05
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally22:33
*** echoingu_ has joined #openstack-rally22:39
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC22:42
*** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-rally22:54
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally23:07
*** echoing__ has joined #openstack-rally23:09
*** echoingu_ has quit IRC23:12
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC23:12
*** echoing__ has quit IRC23:23
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally23:25
*** echoingumesh has quit IRC23:44
*** echoingumesh has joined #openstack-rally23:44
« Sunday, 2015-04-26 Index Tuesday, 2015-04-28 »

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!