16:00:41 <jgriffith> #startmeeting cinder 16:00:42 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Mar 26 16:00:41 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is jgriffith. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:43 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:46 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder' 16:00:50 <thingee> o/ 16:00:54 <ameade> o/ 16:01:15 <bill_az_> bill here, standing in for jungleboy 16:01:29 <jgriffith> hemna_: 16:01:48 <avishay> hi 16:01:49 <jgriffith> No winston yet, but he was in #cinder so maybe he'll be along shortly 16:01:54 <jgriffith> avishay: morning/evening 16:02:17 <jgriffith> DuncanT: paging Duncan, paging DuncanT 16:02:18 <jgriffith> :) 16:02:27 <jgriffith> alright, let's make this quick 16:02:48 <jgriffith> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CinderMeetings 16:03:27 <jgriffith> #topic RC1 status 16:03:35 <jgriffith> #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/icehouse-rc1 16:03:46 <jgriffith> We have one item left 16:03:54 * ttx lurks 16:04:00 <jgriffith> https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1188189 16:04:04 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1188189 in cinder "Some server-side 'SSL' communication fails to check certificates (use of HTTPSConnection)" [High,In progress] 16:04:38 <jgriffith> This may be bigger than we want to tackle right now, I wouldn't say that everything is covered in what's proposed 16:04:44 <jgriffith> but it's a good chunk 16:04:55 <ttx> jgriffith: also make sure you push https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80817/ in 16:05:07 <ttx> (recent translations) 16:05:13 <thingee> jgriffith: have you heard from daniel? 16:05:16 <jgriffith> ttx: done 16:05:20 <jgriffith> thingee: I have not 16:05:27 <avishay> jgriffith: this involved solidfire and one other driver, right? anything else? 16:05:28 <jgriffith> thingee: and I have some concerns 16:05:36 <jgriffith> I know in my testing this broke upgrades 16:06:00 <jgriffith> Sadly it turns out self-signed certs won't work here for upgrades 16:06:04 <jgriffith> don't know who else uses them 16:06:16 <jgriffith> but I wanted to make sure everybody affected had a close look 16:06:27 <jgriffith> and it may not be something we want to merge at this point 16:06:40 <jgriffith> ttx: done 16:07:00 <jgriffith> Did anybody else look at this (this == ssl patch)? 16:07:20 <avishay> jgriffith: 2 patches right, for solidfire and zadara? 16:07:26 <jgriffith> avishay: yeah 16:07:35 <winston-d> o/ 16:07:38 <jgriffith> avishay: I guess I know the answer to the question about Zadara :( 16:08:02 <jgriffith> So my proposal here is I'll up date the lib and set the flag to not check the cert 16:08:02 <avishay> jgriffith: i was waiting for a +1/2 from the respective maintainers :) 16:08:24 <jgriffith> it doesn't really "fix" the identified issue, but at least it updates to use request lib 16:08:42 <jgriffith> I'll try and track down Zadara, but they've been MIA since last summer 16:08:52 <jgriffith> vlad has moved on I think :) 16:09:08 <jgriffith> anybody object to me landing that today? 16:09:17 * jgriffith doubts anybody cares 16:09:43 * avishay doesn't care 16:09:45 <jgriffith> ok... I'll post a patch later today and push it through 16:10:02 <jgriffith> FYI we're planning to cut RC1 in the morning (my morning) tomorrow 16:10:17 <jgriffith> At this point I don't consider driver bugs to be blockers for RC 16:10:35 <jgriffith> use your judgement in reviews today 16:10:44 <jgriffith> no features disguised as bugs 16:10:47 <jgriffith> no huge patches 16:10:51 <jgriffith> etc etc 16:11:07 <jgriffith> use the same guidelins we use for backports, perhaps even a bit stricter 16:11:11 <jgriffith> good enough? 16:11:22 <jgriffith> any questions, concerns, items they feel MUST be in? 16:11:43 <jgriffith> going once... 16:11:51 <jgriffith> going twice... 16:12:02 <vbala> jgriffith: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/81517/ 16:12:02 <jgriffith> Gone!! 16:12:05 <jgriffith> BAH 16:12:17 <avishay> so close :) 16:12:35 <winston-d_> :) 16:12:38 <vbala> :) 16:12:41 <jgriffith> vbala: I have to say all of the last minute patches for vmware are very tiring 16:12:55 <jgriffith> vbala: that being said no problems with this one 16:12:58 <vbala> sorry for that 16:12:59 <jgriffith> You've got plenty of reviews 16:13:07 <jgriffith> vbala: no problem, that's how it goes 16:13:15 <vbala> ok :) 16:13:17 <jgriffith> vbala: I'm just voicing my concern :) 16:13:24 <hartsocks> my apologies on that mark. 16:13:37 <jgriffith> vbala: I'll have a look at your patch after the meeting and likely merge it 16:13:47 <jgriffith> vbala: you be around on IRC incase there's an issue? 16:13:52 <vbala> jgriffith: thanks 16:14:07 <jgriffith> np 16:14:11 <jgriffith> ok... anybody else? 16:14:21 <jgriffith> Gone 16:14:28 <jgriffith> #topic design summit sessions 16:14:45 <jgriffith> #link http://summit.openstack.org/ 16:15:02 <jgriffith> Surely people don't want to leave all the topics to me :) 16:15:23 <rushiagr> hello folks! sorry, late 16:15:25 <jgriffith> I know we've all been really busy, but hopefully after tomorrow we can shift gears abit 16:15:43 <jgriffith> I'd like to see some proposals start filtering in after tomorrow 16:16:01 <jgriffith> If you have something in mind let me know, or get it posted 16:16:18 <avishay> 0 proposals? 16:16:20 <jgriffith> I'll be going through old BP's and talks we've had in the past and putting some topics together tonight 16:16:21 <rushiagr> is this regarding design summit sessions? 16:16:25 <jgriffith> rushiagr: yes 16:16:32 <jgriffith> http://summit.openstack.org/ 16:16:38 <jgriffith> avishay: yeah.. .ZERO. 16:16:46 <jgriffith> weird for this bunch eh? 16:16:48 <avishay> i know there is interest in a follow-up to replication 16:16:50 <avishay> very 16:16:58 <thingee> jgriffith: thought this was the plan 16:16:59 <jgriffith> avishay: haha... that goes without saying 16:17:07 <rushiagr> I have some desire to implement AWS style filtering in APIs, if Cinder people like the idea 16:17:18 <xyang1> avishay: we can add a topic on adding consistency groups support? 16:17:31 <thingee> jgriffith: as a result, we can just focus on stability! 16:17:37 <avishay> xyang1: if you plan on implementing it :) 16:17:39 <jgriffith> rushiagr: submit it, but fair warning I have strong opinions based on your last BP 16:17:39 <ameade> any thoughts around breaking out the brick library? 16:17:42 <jgriffith> :) 16:17:47 <jgriffith> thingee: :) 16:17:56 <rushiagr> jgriffith: any feedback is good feedback for me :) 16:17:59 <winston-d> didn't we agree to have no design sessions and have bbq instead? 16:18:06 <jgriffith> ameade: yes, there will be a session by me to better describe that and actually make it happen 16:18:08 <xyang1> avishay: sure, I'll try:) 16:18:15 <jgriffith> ameade: need some coordination with gantt 16:18:16 <jgriffith> etc 16:18:19 <thingee> yes there will be bbq instead of sessions. 16:18:26 <ameade> jgriffith: sweet, okay 16:18:27 <jgriffith> mmmmmm bbq 16:18:36 <thingee> bbq sessions 16:18:37 <xyang1> avishay: but I think we haven't decided whether it sould be at volume level yet 16:18:50 <winston-d> i have some idea, but i need to talk to vendors first 16:18:55 <avishay> xyang1: fight it out at the summit, looks like i'm skipping this one :) 16:18:56 <jgriffith> xyang1: it should :) 16:19:01 <jgriffith> cage match 16:19:03 <rushiagr> jgriffith: by last bp you mean regarding EC2 APIs right? 16:19:10 <jgriffith> rushiagr: correct 16:19:27 <jgriffith> rushiagr: regardless, it's good summit topic IMO 16:19:30 <xyang1> jgriffith, avishay: I'll suggest a topic on that 16:19:38 <jgriffith> xyang1: thanks 16:19:45 <rushiagr> jgriffith: I'd love to hear your opinions. I'm all in for the best way forward for Cinder and OpenStack 16:19:50 <avishay> i don't think it makes sense to have consistency groups in juno...do basic replication first...of course plan replication to allow for consistency groups 16:20:06 <jgriffith> I'd also like to get with bswartz and talk about Cinder versus Manilla 16:20:20 <jgriffith> we should have a better plan there and be working together 16:20:31 <rushiagr> jgriffith: cool, I'll think over it and submit it up 16:20:38 <xyang1> avishay: I thought it didn't make it into icehouse because it operates at volume level? 16:20:49 <avishay> xyang1: that's not why :) 16:20:52 <jgriffith> xyang1: no 16:21:02 <jgriffith> xyang1: some people had concerns about that 16:21:06 <xyang1> avishay: did bswartz say it only works at container (group) level for netapp? 16:21:19 <jgriffith> xyang1: avishay regardless save it for later IMO 16:21:30 <akerr> xyang1: yes, our replication is at the container level 16:21:33 <jgriffith> avishay: oh noooos... you may not be there you said? 16:22:01 <avishay> jgriffith: correct, but i think ronenkat should be there who is taking over that bit at IBM 16:22:02 <jgriffith> so history here for those that don't know; netapp and Gluster I believe can't do replication at volume level (maybe others) 16:22:17 <jgriffith> eharney: if I'm wrong about Gluster throw a shoe at me 16:22:38 <jgriffith> so there may be others... the problem then is that we end up with this weird API 16:22:40 * winston-d_ hands a stone to eharney just in case. 16:22:40 <avishay> jgriffith: to be specific, they can't do failover/failback at the volume level, only at the "container" level 16:22:41 <eharney> correct, Gluster currently can replicate N Cinder volumes as a chunk 16:22:50 <jgriffith> some do groups, some do volumes etc 16:22:58 <jgriffith> so that's what we need to brainstorm on 16:23:23 <jgriffith> how do we satisfy the different variants without an ugly API 16:23:40 <avishay> so with netapp they could only have ~500 replicated volumes if i remember correctly (500 containers), and glusterfs i think 1 :) 16:23:45 <jgriffith> might mean it's by extension only, or something else 16:23:59 <jgriffith> or just stepping back and thinking about how to abstract all of the deltas 16:24:24 <jgriffith> avishay: yeah, it's like whack-a-mole... solve one problem another pops up :) 16:24:30 <avishay> i'm just worried about the scalability issues when people add SAN drivers to manilla :) 16:24:50 <jgriffith> avishay: context? 16:24:56 <avishay> jgriffith: being a smartass 16:25:10 <jgriffith> avishay: ohh, the "default" context :) 16:25:34 <jgriffith> avishay: you know that's the first thing I'm going to do to get my revenge right? 16:25:35 <avishay> jgriffith: just like block storage management doesn't really fit well with file systems 16:25:45 * jgriffith ports all Cinder drivers to Manilla 16:25:46 <avishay> jgriffith: :) 16:25:55 <avishay> each file is a volume 16:26:07 <jgriffith> nice! 16:26:14 <jgriffith> Ok... we digress 16:26:20 <jgriffith> some things I've got on my list: 16:26:20 <avishay> then limit all filesystems in manilla to have a limited number of files because controller X support only that many 16:26:24 <jgriffith> 1. Replication 16:26:28 <jgriffith> 2. Brick 16:26:38 <jgriffith> 3. Multi-Attach 16:26:46 <jgriffith> 4. LIO as default target 16:26:55 <jgriffith> 5. HA LVM 16:27:13 <avishay> ok i'm done being a smartass for now 16:27:15 <jgriffith> other things I've been thinking about: taskflow 16:27:15 <avishay> what's HA LVM? 16:27:31 <winston-d> We are looing for a way to collect per volume basis usage statistics from all Cinder back-ends. 16:27:41 <jgriffith> avishay: I would really like to implement an HA solution for the ref LVM driver 16:27:56 <thingee> harlowja_away: ^ 16:27:56 <winston-d> And we have multiple back-ends from different vendors. 16:27:58 <avishay> jgriffith: so HA for cinder-volume? 16:28:00 <jgriffith> winston-d: OHHH!! Don't let me forget that! Make sure you submit it 16:28:12 <jgriffith> avishay: well for the driver 16:28:24 <jgriffith> since most backends will have their own setup/impl 16:28:33 <jgriffith> just something to make LVM even better :) 16:28:44 <avishay> jgriffith: i.e., necessary modifications to the driver to allow cinder-volume to run active/passive? or active/active? 16:28:50 <jgriffith> winston-d: also the auto-detect idea 16:28:53 <akerr> jgriffith: Maybe I'm the only one still not 100% clear on expectations or timelines, but would a topic around certification process (vendor CI systems) be useful? 16:29:06 <winston-d> jgriffith: sure. 16:29:21 <jgriffith> avishay: I'm talking strictly LVM and to start A/P most likely 16:29:36 <jgriffith> A/A depending on how it goes 16:29:51 <jgriffith> akerr: yes, that's a required topic for sure 16:29:56 <winston-d> jgriffith, bswartz you guys also want to talk about one driver from multiple back-ends? 16:29:59 <jgriffith> akerr: that whole things is getting ugly IMO 16:30:06 <jgriffith> Too many cooks in the kitche 16:30:07 <jgriffith> n 16:30:09 <zhiyan> thingee: hi, may i know does cinder extension stuff still on the table? which we talked in last summit? 16:31:03 <jgriffith> Ok, we've obviously all got more ideas than we have slots so let's get them written up :) 16:31:13 <jgriffith> #topic open-discussion 16:31:33 <jgriffith> anybody have any thoughts on anything? 16:31:34 <bswartz> winston-d, jgriffith: yeah we'll definitely talk about that 16:31:35 <jgriffith> OHHH 16:31:43 <jgriffith> I have some other things: 16:31:55 <bswartz> sorry I missed the first 30 minutes of this meeting I had a conflict 16:31:58 <jgriffith> At yesterdays TC meeting we did an analysis on the gaps that Cinder has 16:32:09 <jgriffith> ie gaps regarding what we require for new projects 16:32:17 <jgriffith> There were two big things: 16:32:21 <thingee> zhiyan: I've mentioned in the past the work around that does not block extensions 16:32:24 <jgriffith> 1. Charter/Mission statement 16:32:31 <jgriffith> 2. Security team 16:32:46 <jgriffith> Item 1 I can take care of pretty easy myself 16:33:00 <jgriffith> Item 2 is something I'll need help/volunteers on 16:33:28 <jgriffith> The idea of a security team is a person/people that are focused on security related issues for Cinder 16:33:44 <winston-d> What does security team usually do? 16:33:47 <jgriffith> They don't have to "fix" everything, but the idea is that they keep an eye on security related things 16:34:05 <jgriffith> would need to have good knowledge of security issues in the cloud 16:34:12 <jgriffith> and how to keep things safe in the code 16:34:22 <jgriffith> They would be sort of a first point of contact/triage 16:34:37 <avishay> also need to check IDs at the entrance to cinder summit sessions 16:34:40 <bswartz> does the security team get guns to shoot people? 16:34:43 <jgriffith> I'm admittedly not a great security person so I'm looking for help here 16:34:57 <jgriffith> it may come from this team or from the broader OpenStack community 16:35:09 <akerr> bswartz: only tasers 16:35:16 <jgriffith> but if anybody here digs security and thinking in a paranoid manner let me know :) 16:35:24 <avishay> jgriffith: not my strong point 16:35:31 <jgriffith> bswartz: yes, but only squirt guns 16:35:37 <xyang1> does other project already have security team? Maybe we can share with them? 16:35:39 <jgriffith> avishay: yeah... me neither :( 16:35:45 <jgriffith> xyang1: yes and yes 16:36:00 <jgriffith> I just wanted to throw it out to keep everybdoy in the loop 16:36:19 <jgriffith> Ok... anybody else have anything? 16:36:44 <winston-d> I can volunteer for the security team stuff. 16:36:54 <jgriffith> winston-d: awesome! 16:37:27 <ameade> besides saying "review all my patches" i got nothing lol 16:37:44 <jgriffith> ameade: haha 16:37:58 <winston-d> we may have special needs for security for payment use case and stuff. 16:38:14 <jgriffith> winston-d: ahh... yes, you'd have a special interest 16:38:27 <hemna> hey guys 16:38:30 <ameade> I do wanna say that you guys have been pretty quick with doing reviews and I appreciate that 16:38:34 <hemna> sorry was in a preso the last hour.... 16:39:55 <hemna> so for multi attach 16:40:02 <hemna> I've actually been working on it this week 16:40:33 <hemna> I have the BP assigned to me now and will submit it in Juno J2 at the latest 16:40:53 <winston-d> hemna: making good progress already? 16:40:58 <hemna> winston-d, yah 16:41:13 <hemna> It's going to require changes in nova, cinderclient, cinder to work 16:41:21 <bswartz> hemna: are you building on zhiyan's work? 16:41:30 <hemna> I think I'm close to getting it working 16:41:37 <hemna> bswartz, yah I took what he had and am running with it. 16:41:44 <bswartz> okay good 16:41:45 <hemna> his code lacked a lot of needed changes to work 16:42:08 <hemna> The BP itself talks about this idea of setting a volume as shareable or not 16:42:18 <hemna> I'm not working on that piece for now 16:42:24 <hemna> wasn't sure if we wanted that or not 16:42:39 <bswartz> I think the hardest part of multiattach will be the database schema changes needed, and the upgrade procedure around those 16:42:40 <hemna> so I'm assuming all volumes at this point are multi attach candidates. 16:42:48 <kmartin> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/blueprints/multi-attach-volume 16:42:54 <hemna> bswartz, yah I think I have that part working already 16:43:06 <bswartz> hemna: nice 16:43:11 <hemna> I don't have the downgrade done yet, I'll do that after I finalize the schema 16:43:50 <hemna> so many changes in so many pieces, we'll have to coordinate the patches landing 16:43:58 <bswartz> hemna: is your work available as a WIP? 16:44:03 <hemna> cinder api v1/v2 changes, cinderclient, etc 16:44:06 <hemna> bswartz, not yet 16:44:43 <zhiyan> hemna: thanks for working on this 16:44:52 <hemna> I wanted to try and get WIP patches up prior to Atlanta 16:45:04 <zhiyan> hemna: and is there a review link can share with us? 16:45:09 <hemna> zhiyan, yw :) I'm very interested in it, and figured I should pick it up 16:45:14 <hemna> zhiyan, not yet 16:45:34 <hemna> I'll try and get some WIP reviews up prior to the Atlanta dev conf. 16:45:49 <hemna> I think it's getting close to working now as it is......but...no unit test changes yet :P 16:45:55 <bswartz> hemna: netapp has interest in that feature too so feel free to ask for help or bother us for reviews 16:46:02 <hemna> the unit tests will probably harder than the code changes itself. 16:46:11 <hemna> bswartz, ok coolio. will do. 16:46:36 <akerr> hemna: ice cream can grease the review wheels 16:46:39 <hemna> I've not touched these parts of cinder before, so it's all been a great learning experience so far 16:48:43 <jgriffith> Ok...anything else? 16:49:01 <jgriffith> that's a wrap... 16:49:03 <jgriffith> #endmeeting