15:00:32 #startmeeting ceilometer 15:00:33 Meeting started Thu Feb 11 15:00:32 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ildikov. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:34 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:36 The meeting name has been set to 'ceilometer' 15:01:22 hi 15:02:27 hi 15:02:32 o/ 15:02:46 \o/ 15:02:57 /o\ 15:03:15 _o_ 15:03:19 lol 15:03:45 O_- 15:03:53 orz 15:04:03 ok, I guess we can start then :) 15:04:14 #topic recurring: roadmap items (new/old/blockers) https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Telemetry/RoadMap 15:05:06 we have three weeks left until the freeze 15:05:32 o/ 15:06:06 <_nadya_> I'm doing POC about Redis for transformers cache. It's quite ready, I need someone to take a look 15:06:07 does anyone have any new items we should dicuss? 15:06:11 <_nadya_> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/276714/2 15:06:11 _nadya_: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/276714/ - ceilometer - [WIP] Add cache abstraction 15:07:43 <_nadya_> also, I'd like to ask Rohit regarding https://review.openstack.org/#/c/218155/ 15:07:43 _nadya_: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/218155/ - ceilometer-specs - Propose the removal of WSME from ceilometer and aodh 15:07:45 _nadya_: I saw Gordon's comment on it 15:07:58 I have a spec. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273475/ support collect instance port meters. 15:07:59 ljxiash: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273475/ - ceilometer-specs - Support collect neutron port meters 15:08:11 patchbot: thanks. 15:08:56 _nadya_: do you want to have a discussion about the cache here or let's do that in the review? 15:09:07 <_nadya_> ljxiash: we need +1 from neutron folks first, could you please ping the to review the new version? 15:09:37 <_nadya_> ildikov: I think, it would be better to do in review 15:09:46 _nadya_: yes, I can. 15:10:09 _nadya_: ok, cool 15:10:45 _nadya_: reagrding the spec you linked, is the timing you wanted to discuss? 15:12:17 <_nadya_> ildikov: what spec :)? 15:12:33 <_nadya_> ildikov: ah, cdent's, yes 15:12:39 ljxiash: do you plan this for Mitaka? 15:12:50 _nadya_: that one :) 15:13:09 <_nadya_> ildikov: I cannot imagine how much time it may require 15:14:24 _nadya_: well, I'm not sure either, I think jd__ had dreams about removing WSME a while ago, maybe he has ideas :) 15:15:05 cdent: any idea about how much time/effort would be that change? 15:15:08 I think it's mostly cdent dream, but I still agree 15:15:27 ildikov: We plan to have this spec merged in Mitaka, then we upload the poc code, and finish it in N release. 15:15:30 I dream of it, but won't have any chance to do the work. I think rohit was getting interested in doing at least the aodh part. 15:15:36 It is probably quite a chunk of work. 15:15:49 yup 15:15:55 jd__: ah, ok I didn't remember well then 15:16:02 I would guess that it would be a bit foolhardy to make it mitaka unless there is a devoted person. 15:16:03 cdent: yeah, I got that part 15:16:03 it might also be a good occasion to define a new version of the API though 15:16:22 ildikov: does this way work? 15:16:39 not sure porting for porting is worth it 15:16:42 jd__: yeah, I had that thought as well 15:17:02 ljxiash: it's fine to finish it in the N-release 15:17:31 ljxiash: I wonder whether we opened the specs for Newton already, I will check 15:18:15 jd__: yeah, it might worth a design session if we consider API change as well 15:18:46 especially as it seems to be a bit in risk for Mitaka from timing perspective 15:20:33 _nadya_: I think we will need to wait for Rohit's answer on the review, I'm a bit skeptic based on the brief discussion above 15:20:50 <_nadya_> ildikov: sure 15:21:30 anything else for blueprints? 15:21:48 a design session to define an API? I envy your optimism ildikov 15:22:11 <_nadya_> jd__: +1 15:22:31 <_nadya_> jd__: Monasca+Ceilo ? 15:22:35 jd__: at least to see whether we can use this WSME removal opportunity to smth else, than proting 15:23:05 jd__: but maybe I'm just too optimist :) 15:23:07 _nadya_: what's the question? 15:23:44 _nadya_: as a design session or new API? 15:23:44 ildikov: yeah, I'm still waiting for someone to propose a new design :) 15:24:09 <_nadya_> I'm talking about Jay Pipes proposal 15:24:16 jd__: :) 15:24:18 <_nadya_> Ceilometer and Monasca are both type:service projects that are both 15:24:18 <_nadya_> performing telemetry functionality in their REST APIs. The API WG should 15:24:18 <_nadya_> work with both communities to come up with a 6-12 month plan for 15:24:20 <_nadya_> creating a ​*single*​ OpenStack Telemetry REST API that both communities 15:24:22 <_nadya_> would be able to implement separately as they see fit. 15:24:52 _nadya_: joker 15:25:19 <_nadya_> :) 15:25:30 _nadya_: a-ha, I missed it I think, although I would be surprised if there wasn't any proposal like this... 15:25:35 we can nominate cdent, he is both in Telemetry and API-WG 15:25:40 * jd__ flies away 15:26:22 yeah, I'm also part of service catalog tng and the general consensus there is that overlapping implemenation of the same service is totally bonkers 15:26:23 _nadya_: when did Jay propose this? 15:26:35 _nadya_: just to see how much time we have left :) 15:26:54 <_nadya_> ildikov: subj is Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Proposal for having a service type registry and curated OpenStack REST API 15:27:13 _nadya_: I need to write an email to gordon and roland to see what concrete steps we can take towards alignment of the REST API. 15:27:17 _nadya_: cool, tnx, will check 15:27:29 this is gonna be epic 15:27:30 _nadya_: nothing is gonna be done in a short time frame, don't worry ;) 15:27:50 jd__: drama queen :P 15:27:57 jaypipes: I don't think either of us started worrying here :) 15:27:57 lol 15:28:06 ildikov: :) 15:28:13 <_nadya_> jaypipes: I understand, just wanted to let Ceilo team about this :) 15:28:20 <_nadya_> know 15:28:53 jd__: then it seems we will even have a joint session about API with Monasca :) 15:29:05 why not 15:29:51 <_nadya_> one more plea regarding specs: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/162167/ . JFYI, I think we will wait for POC from Igor first and I will merge this spec (if everything ok) 15:30:54 _nadya_: cool, sounds good 15:32:18 _nadya_: you can link the POC to the spec, when it's up to address concerns there if there is still any 15:32:29 <_nadya_> ildikov: ok 15:32:48 cool 15:32:58 anything else for specs or APIs? 15:33:44 ok, let's move to the next topic then 15:33:49 #topic aodh topics 15:34:13 liusheng: do you have any updates or heads ups here? 15:35:06 hi ildikov, about the composite alarm, I will upload new patchset 15:35:32 liusheng: ok, cool 15:35:58 sorry, I am almost AFK of community works this week, because of Chinese new year :( 15:35:58 liusheng: do you have any issues with it to raise or it goes well? 15:36:33 I need to address sileht's suggesion 15:36:34 liusheng: yeah, I know, no problem 15:36:43 liusheng: tnx for joining the meeting :) 15:37:03 liusheng: happy new year then :) 15:37:07 <_nadya_> happy new year! 15:37:16 thanks :) 15:38:01 liusheng: and also happy new year :) 15:38:34 and also, hope we can help to review the aodhclient's patches 15:38:36 thanks 15:40:00 right, aodhclient patches: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/python-aodhclient+status:open 15:40:20 anyone who has time please take a look ^^ 15:40:48 anything else for Aodh? 15:41:32 #topic ceilometer topics 15:42:12 anything else for Ceilometer than what we discussed above? 15:42:43 <_nadya_> yep, 1 sec 15:43:26 <_nadya_> need more eyes for metadata caching patch #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/267078/10 15:43:46 <_nadya_> ityaptin_ uses oslo cache there, I'm not an expert 15:44:29 _nadya_: are there open questions regarding that one? 15:45:18 _nadya_: I mean what we would need to discuss explicitely 15:45:34 <_nadya_> ildikov: hmm...don't think so, may do it in review 15:45:45 ildikov: No questions from my side) it's under development now. But I will be grateful for review ) 15:45:46 _nadya_: thanks for the change, I wonder whether that functionality can be easily disable/enable ? :-) 15:46:25 liusheng: Yes 15:46:25 <_nadya_> liusheng: yep, it should be able to disable it 15:46:35 ityaptin_: ok, cool, I saw it's in WIP I was just wondering whether there's anything we could move forward here 15:46:39 _nadya_: cool 15:48:37 any other items to Ceilo? 15:49:15 #topic gnocchi topics 15:49:21 <_nadya_> jfyi https://review.openstack.org/#/c/272644/2 15:50:37 _nadya_: tnx 15:51:32 jd__: sileht: have you seen the patch _nadya_ linked? ^^ 15:52:14 ildikov, +1 15:53:04 sileht: cool 15:53:20 jd__: sileht: any news about Gnocchi? 15:55:52 ok, I take it as a no, let's move on then :) 15:56:04 #topic Open discussion 15:56:27 anything else we would need to discuss? 15:56:46 you can advertise session proposals to vote on for instance ;) 15:57:13 boycot voting, it's marketing bullshit 15:57:34 cdent: I know, we can vote on that too, I'm with you :) 15:57:42 and with jd__ :) 15:58:46 allright, it seems we're finished for today 15:58:54 ildikov: sorry, was afk :) 15:59:08 Gnocchi 2.0 coming soon! 15:59:23 jd__: \o/ :) 15:59:42 jd__: you have half minute for more news if you have 16:00:14 I'll keep it for next week ;) 16:00:21 ok, thanks for joining the meeting everyone 16:00:31 C U next week! :) 16:00:37 jd__: cool ;) 16:00:42 #endmeeting