16:00:10 <smcginnis> #startmeeting cinder
16:00:11 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jun  6 16:00:10 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is smcginnis. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:12 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:14 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
16:00:16 <smcginnis> #topic Rollcall
16:00:19 <smcginnis> ping DuncanT diablo_rojo, diablo_rojo_phon, rajinir tbarron xyang xyang1 e0ne gouthamr thingee erlon tpsilva patrickeast tommylikehu eharney geguileo smcginnis lhx_ lhx__ aspiers jgriffith moshele hwalsh felipemonteiro lpetrut lseki _alastor_
16:00:30 <tommylikehu> hi
16:00:47 <erlon_> hey
16:00:48 <ganso> hello
16:00:52 <e0ne_> hi
16:01:03 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-rocky-meeting-agendas Agenda
16:01:21 <smcginnis> Hey everyone. I will be your jungleboyj for today's festivities.
16:01:32 <erlon_> :P
16:01:45 <xyang> hi
16:01:53 <e0ne_> smcginnis: will you argue with yourself about Thursday?
16:02:01 <smcginnis> e0ne_: Hehe  :)
16:02:05 <walshh> hi
16:02:34 <smcginnis> OK, guess we can get going...
16:02:37 <smcginnis> #topic Announcements
16:02:47 <smcginnis> Rocky-2 milestone deadline is tomorrow.
16:02:50 <smcginnis> #link https://releases.openstack.org/rocky/schedule.html
16:03:05 <smcginnis> I need to actually check with jungleboyj on that, but I think we are in good shape.
16:03:37 <smcginnis> Jay has also put up a set of patches marking drivers as unsupported for lack of CI.
16:03:45 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/cinder+branch:master+topic:ci_unsupported
16:04:23 <smcginnis> I probably should add it as another agenda item to discuss, but I wanted to point out that one of the drivers in that set is the Brocade FCZM driver.
16:04:35 <e0ne_> smcginnis, jungleboyj: please, don't forget about releasing python-brick-cinderclient-ext for Rocky
16:04:53 <smcginnis> Personally, I would like to hold off on that one for awhile since we did give Cisco a lot of time for theirs.
16:04:55 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: yes we are good.  I will tag today.
16:05:04 <smcginnis> So if you have any opinions on that, please comment on the review.
16:05:07 <smcginnis> jungleboyj: Great.
16:05:07 <e0ne_> smcginnis: it means, we'll drop zomenanager...
16:05:22 <rajinir> o/
16:05:28 <smcginnis> e0ne_: Well, ironically, the Cisco one is now reporting regularly.
16:05:42 <e0ne_> smcginnis: oh, it's a good news
16:05:44 <smcginnis> That was my fear as well, but now we at least have one.
16:05:50 <jungleboyj> e0ne_:  will do.
16:05:56 <e0ne_> jungleboyj: thanks!
16:06:40 <smcginnis> python-brick-cinderclient-ext is cycle-with-intermediary, not cycle-with-milestones, so at least process wise that could wait.
16:06:48 <smcginnis> But still good to get the recent fixes released.
16:07:31 <e0ne_> smcginnis: +1
16:08:14 <smcginnis> That's all I had for announcements. Anyone know of any important announcements to bring up?
16:09:01 <smcginnis> #topic Rocky Priorities
16:09:09 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-spec-review-tracking
16:09:34 <kien-ha> hi
16:09:36 <smcginnis> I haven't reviewed this list too closely lately, but please take a look to see if anything needs review focus.
16:09:48 <smcginnis> kien-ha: Welcome
16:10:02 <smcginnis> There are a few new driver patches outstanding, but tomorrow is the deadline to have those merged.
16:10:16 <smcginnis> And last I looked, most of the outstanding ones did not have CI up and stable yet.
16:10:32 <e0ne_> :(
16:11:14 <smcginnis> On the plus side, there were a few that were added, so that's nice to see.
16:11:54 <e0ne_> +1
16:12:20 <smcginnis> #topic Check-in on HA development progress
16:12:30 <smcginnis> geguileo: I believe this is the weekly prod. :)
16:12:47 <geguileo> smcginnis: lol
16:13:00 <geguileo> smcginnis: I only have 1 comment from tommylikehu in the devref
16:13:13 <erlon_> geguileo, SHOULD HAVE SOME MINE TOO
16:13:14 <geguileo> I'm still waiting for other reviews
16:13:18 <erlon_> opss
16:13:18 <tommylikehu> erlon add more
16:13:26 <erlon_> lol
16:13:28 <geguileo> erlon_: oooops, I must have missed it
16:13:30 <geguileo> my bad
16:13:32 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/571242/
16:13:54 <geguileo> erlon_: Oh, you added them today
16:14:04 <geguileo> sorry, it's been a crazy day
16:14:06 <smcginnis> geguileo: Should it be un-WIPd and doc build failures fixed?
16:14:13 <smcginnis> Just thinking that might get more reviews then.
16:14:25 <geguileo> doc failures are my todo notes
16:14:26 <erlon_> usually does
16:14:41 <geguileo> I'd like to get some more input
16:14:49 <geguileo> and I'll go over current comments to fix things
16:14:58 <geguileo> so a couple more eyes would be great to have
16:14:59 <smcginnis> OK, please take a look and give geguileo feedback.
16:15:30 <smcginnis> geguileo: Anything else we should discuss on the subject?
16:15:39 <geguileo> not at the moment
16:15:48 <smcginnis> geguileo: OK, thanks!
16:16:00 <smcginnis> #topic Follow-up Topics from the Forum
16:16:05 <smcginnis> First, placement...
16:16:15 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-cinder-placement
16:16:34 <erlon_> still didnt have time to spent on that :/
16:16:38 <smcginnis> Really wish this would have been recorded since there weren't a lot of Cinder folks there.
16:17:01 <smcginnis> But I think most of the concerns raised were addressed and answered.
16:17:28 <smcginnis> The biggest concern for me being the ability to design its use (if we choose to) such that we can run without it.
16:17:31 <smcginnis> In a clean way.
16:17:53 <geguileo> what's the big win for us?
16:18:20 <geguileo> we don't have that many things to track...
16:18:27 <smcginnis> Having a common external data source rather than reimplementing what they have done into local DB access.
16:18:29 <erlon_> geguileo, can you recap why you -2 on the placement patch?
16:18:31 <geguileo> and they are going to do the tracking like we do, in the DB
16:18:38 <geguileo> erlon_: sure
16:18:41 <smcginnis> Anyone have a link to that patch handy?
16:19:17 <tommylikehu> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/559718/
16:19:17 <geguileo> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/559718/
16:19:17 <e0ne_> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/559718/
16:19:20 <e0ne_> :)
16:19:24 <smcginnis> Hah!
16:19:31 <geguileo> lol
16:19:34 <tommylikehu> it's easy to find out the -2 one from my lists
16:19:37 <e0ne_> smcginnis: please, choose only one
16:19:44 <smcginnis> Thanks. :D
16:20:19 <smcginnis> Well, I don't want to spend too much time on it in the meeting, but just reminder that we should continue that discussion.
16:20:21 <geguileo> My concerns are that we are going to introduce a new component that its basically doing what we were going to do in the schedulers to fix this
16:20:28 <smcginnis> And probably address some of the comments on the patch.
16:20:44 <geguileo> They are using the DB to avoid races and to have a single source of truth
16:20:48 <geguileo> Same thing we were going to do
16:20:59 <geguileo> but now we'll have an extra service (or N on HA)
16:21:10 <geguileo> Which uses more resources and introduces additional delays
16:21:14 <smcginnis> geguileo: But rather than needing to implement all of the logic they already have in our own scheduler, when running in HA we can defer that to placement.
16:21:28 <erlon_> geguileo, I think the same
16:21:43 <smcginnis> I would assume large deployments that are going to care about HA are going to be running it anyway for Nova, so it's one more config setting.
16:22:11 <smcginnis> CERN has 20 instances running, for instance.
16:22:24 <geguileo> and one more interconnection source of problems for us
16:22:52 <smcginnis> Vs more complexity in our scheduler.
16:23:06 <smcginnis> Anyway, a lot of tradeoffs to consider here.
16:23:07 <tommylikehu> smcginnis: +1
16:23:11 <erlon_> e0ne_, you sent a spec for implementing that in the DB, how much change do you thing would be needed?
16:23:25 <erlon_> it does not seem too much
16:23:36 <e0ne_> erlon_: it was just an idea before I read about placement
16:23:43 <smcginnis> e0ne_: Do you have a link to that patch too?
16:23:50 <smcginnis> Would be good for folks to get the full picture.
16:23:54 <e0ne_> I thinks we shouldn't re-invent the wheel
16:24:05 <e0ne_> #link https://review.openstack.org/556529
16:24:10 <tommylikehu> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/556529/
16:24:11 <smcginnis> Thank you
16:24:23 <e0ne_> I'll abandon my patch in flavor of placement support
16:24:57 * geguileo fears this is going to be as good for Cinder as privsep was
16:25:24 <erlon_> e0ne_, Im just trying to measure the impact/size of both changes. If we are doing something Nova already doing in placement, but that is minimal, duplicating code it wouldnt be that much a concern
16:25:31 <smcginnis> geguileo: Do you view privsep as a bad thing?
16:25:54 <geguileo> smcginnis: privsep for OS-Brick has been the worst thing that has ever happened to us
16:26:03 <geguileo> it serializes our requests
16:26:13 <geguileo> as it can only run 1 thing at a time
16:26:25 <smcginnis> geguileo: I don't think those involved in the lock-setup upgrade of rootwrap changes would agree.
16:26:56 <geguileo> smcginnis: but anyone doing multipathing in the real world would
16:26:57 <smcginnis> Anyway, let's move on since that was just one item in the list. :D
16:27:03 <geguileo> ok
16:27:08 <erlon_> ok
16:27:10 <smcginnis> HA Active/Active work
16:27:15 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR18-cinder-ha-forum
16:27:23 <smcginnis> Not sure if there was too much here to discuss.
16:27:31 <smcginnis> The need for docs was raised.
16:27:47 <smcginnis> One interesting question to me was someone asking about HA A/A for the backup service.
16:27:55 <geguileo> I couldn't agree more with the docs comment   XD
16:28:00 <smcginnis> ;)
16:28:05 <geguileo> Backup already supports HA A/A
16:28:15 <geguileo> Nothing to do there, job done
16:28:17 <geguileo> rofl
16:28:20 <e0ne_> :)
16:28:30 <smcginnis> Hah, I guess that points back to the need for more docs then.
16:29:14 <smcginnis> The other interesting/concerning thing in the session was an assumption by someone that HA A/A would provide performance scaling.
16:29:31 <smcginnis> I think we clarified that, but I was surprised by it.
16:30:18 <geguileo> it could, since you have now multiple privseps
16:30:31 <smcginnis> geguileo: Haha, OK, fair enough. :)
16:30:37 <geguileo> };-)
16:30:41 <smcginnis> Cinder Documentation Work
16:30:43 <smcginnis> hehe, nice
16:30:51 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR18-cinder-documentation-forum
16:31:05 <smcginnis> I believe Jay is planning on devoting some time to this.
16:31:32 <smcginnis> We also had someone from Red Hat there that said their doc team was switching how they do things and would be getting more involved upstream.
16:31:47 <smcginnis> Which would be really nice. I forget the number, but they had a good number of people.
16:32:24 <smcginnis> One of the biggest issues raised was that the current docs have a lot of technical detail (when we actually have docs on something) but doesn't really guide folks on what they need and why.
16:32:56 <smcginnis> So I think they were going to work on making things more task driven rather than just a dump of config options and CLI examples.
16:33:24 <smcginnis> There was also the need for more standalone Cinder documentation.
16:33:34 <smcginnis> And how/where/why you would want to use that.
16:34:59 <smcginnis> I think that's all from the Forum.
16:35:24 <smcginnis> Would have been useful to have more Cinder folks present, but we'll see what happens now with the talk about events.
16:35:42 <smcginnis> I will say, this one seemed a lot more Design Summit-ish than the last few.
16:36:02 <smcginnis> But maybe that was partly flashbacks from the last Summit in Vancouver. :)
16:36:27 <smcginnis> #topic Continued discussion on Reusing Cinder Drivers/cinder-lib
16:36:50 <smcginnis> I was hoping we would have jgriffith and jungleboyj here.
16:36:54 <erlon_> lol, that is a fase in for the return of the joint summits/ptg
16:37:05 <smcginnis> erlon_: Hah, maybe.
16:37:14 <smcginnis> geguileo: The floor is yours.
16:37:35 * jaypipes shakes fist at other jungleboyj for having same first name.
16:37:44 <geguileo> I know that Hellen tested cinderlib
16:37:52 <jungleboyj> jaypipes: sorry.
16:37:54 <geguileo> and it worked for VMAX on Rocky
16:37:58 <jaypipes> jungleboyj: :)
16:38:02 <smcginnis> walshh?
16:38:11 <geguileo> smcginnis: yup
16:38:12 <jungleboyj> I am kind of peripherally here now.
16:38:21 <walshh> yes, very happy with it
16:38:23 <geguileo> anybody else had time to look at it?
16:38:37 <e0ne_> unfortunately, not :(
16:38:39 <jungleboyj> Seems people are all over on supporting it.
16:38:41 <smcginnis> #chair jungleboyj
16:38:42 <openstack> Current chairs: jungleboyj smcginnis
16:38:46 <erlon_> walshh, did it worked cleanly?
16:38:52 <e0ne_> I hope to have some time to play with it next week
16:39:00 <geguileo> e0ne_: awesome!
16:39:08 <erlon_> e0ne_, +1
16:39:10 <walshh> pretty much...since we have a rest interface to the VMAX we have no external dependencies
16:39:17 <erlon_> me too
16:39:29 <jungleboyj> walshh:  what did you do?
16:40:03 <xyang> geguileo: have you updated your doc on what drivers are tested?
16:40:30 <walshh> it was very easy to plug it in....very little intervention, just follow the readme
16:40:43 <geguileo> xyang: no, I have to do that
16:41:10 <geguileo> xyang: I'll also try to create instructions for each backend
16:41:33 <erlon_> geguileo, is there changes from BE to BE?
16:41:36 <geguileo> walshh: could you send me the config you used (masking passwords and ips) so I can add it?
16:41:52 <walshh> sure
16:41:54 <xyang> geguileo: sounds good
16:42:07 <geguileo> erlon_: what's BE?  r:-???
16:42:12 <erlon_> backend
16:42:18 <geguileo> rofl
16:42:34 <geguileo> only the configuration passed to the init changes
16:42:44 <erlon_> ok
16:42:53 <geguileo> depending on the backend I may need to fix something
16:43:01 <geguileo> like I had to do for Solidfire
16:43:10 <geguileo> that required project_id and user_id to be filled in
16:43:35 <geguileo> erlon_: anything that doesn't work an expected, just let me know and I'll fix it
16:43:53 <erlon_> geguileo, hmm, I think some drivers also use volume type fields
16:43:58 <erlon_> how that is handled?
16:44:08 <erlon_> sure
16:44:23 <geguileo> erlon_: I'd have to check, I think it's a silly volume type with no extra specs
16:44:55 <geguileo> right now it's only covering the most basic case
16:45:02 <erlon_> ok
16:45:05 <geguileo> later I'll add support for fancy stuff through the extra specs
16:46:19 <jungleboyj> geguileo: are you the only one supporting this?
16:46:28 <geguileo> jungleboyj: right now yes
16:46:33 <xyang> geguileo: has anyone tested Unity?
16:46:35 <geguileo> it's a POC right now
16:46:47 <geguileo> xyang: I don't think so
16:46:53 <geguileo> basically I've tested
16:47:08 <geguileo> xtremio, qnap, rbd, lvm, kaminario
16:47:15 <jungleboyj> geguileo: ok.  If this starts having impacts on drivers this gets more complicated.
16:47:21 <geguileo> then solidfire, and vmax have been tested
16:47:36 <geguileo> and I did some basic testing on 3PAR
16:47:46 <geguileo> I'll try to test 3PAR and Nimble soon
16:47:56 <geguileo> jungleboyj: the idea is not to impact the drivers
16:48:04 <geguileo> drivers do their thing like they do for Cinder
16:48:11 <xyang> geguileo: thanks
16:48:28 <geguileo> I don't have access to other storage, so...
16:48:30 <geguileo> lol
16:48:32 <jungleboyj> So that fixes you're working on are all in Cinder lib.
16:48:44 <geguileo> jungleboyj: what fixes? the driver ones?
16:48:48 <geguileo> yes
16:49:01 <jungleboyj> Ok. That is good.
16:49:06 <geguileo> if there's a problem using cinderlib with a driver, what I fix is cinderlib
16:49:11 <geguileo> because it's the one at fault
16:49:41 <erlon_> geguileo, that is, if the driver works on Cinder :p
16:49:46 <jungleboyj> geguileo: cool.
16:49:51 <geguileo> erlon_: precisely!!!
16:50:10 <geguileo> erlon_: it's a good reference for me to know that it's my fault  ;-)
16:50:25 <smcginnis> New third party CI requirement?
16:50:31 <erlon_> lol
16:51:04 <smcginnis> Half joking, but half serious. The only way to know it would work right with all the drivers is if all the drivers are tested with it.
16:51:32 <jungleboyj> smcginnis:  True.
16:51:34 <geguileo> I think we could add it to the tempest run
16:51:46 <geguileo> and have it log the results but never fail even if it fails
16:51:52 <jungleboyj> But I think we have a ways to go for that yet.
16:51:53 <geguileo> it would only take 1 minute or so more
16:51:54 <erlon_> smcginnis, if that still is a PoC does not make sense to even think about that now
16:51:58 <geguileo> since everything is already deployed
16:52:00 <ganso> make it non-voting
16:52:38 <smcginnis> erlon_: Not now, but we are talking about making this a real CI'd thing in gate.
16:52:44 <geguileo> The problem if we add a new job is that it requires deploying things, whereas running it in the same tempest job would skip the deployment time
16:53:08 <tpsilva> but we don't need tempest for that, do we?
16:53:16 <jungleboyj> geguileo: That is a good thing.
16:53:17 <geguileo> tpsilva: we don't
16:53:32 <erlon_> smcginnis, and we would test against LVM?
16:53:33 <geguileo> tpsilva: but if you are running tempest, then you already have everything you need in the controller node
16:53:45 <geguileo> smcginnis: we could test agains LVM and Ceph
16:54:34 <jungleboyj> geguileo: that would be a minimum starting point.
16:54:50 <geguileo> jungleboyj: OK, will start looking into that
16:55:06 <jungleboyj> geguileo:  Thanks.
16:55:18 <geguileo> thank you all  :-)
16:55:26 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: I know you have concerns ... let thoughts?
16:55:34 <jungleboyj> *other
16:56:37 <smcginnis> Nah, nothing right now.
16:56:59 * erlon_ has a quick topic
16:57:06 <smcginnis> One more topic on the agenda and ~3 minutes left.
16:57:20 <smcginnis> #topic Enabling online extend tests by default on devstack
16:57:24 <jungleboyj> Ok. So plan going forward is geguileo will keep working on bugs and look into getting testing set up?
16:57:52 <geguileo> jungleboyj: +1
16:57:55 <e0ne_> jungleboyj: sounds reasonable
16:58:07 <erlon_> so, we are considering adding the online extend tests to run by default on tempest
16:58:07 <smcginnis> erlon_: Type quick! :)
16:58:10 <erlon_> :)
16:58:16 <erlon_> should be quick
16:58:24 <erlon_> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/572188
16:58:40 <smcginnis> That makes sense to me. Anyone know of drivers that do not support this? There shouldn't really be.
16:58:46 <erlon_> we support online extend by default, but does not test it
16:59:00 <jungleboyj> Makes sense to test it.
16:59:05 <erlon_> smcginnis, some NetApp
16:59:14 <erlon_> we are working on the fix
16:59:29 <jungleboyj> erlon_: will it cause issues for them?
16:59:32 <smcginnis> erlon_: Oh, right.
16:59:47 <e0ne_> will it work for nfs?
16:59:57 <erlon_> e0ne_, yes
16:59:58 <smcginnis> It would at least be good to know who needs to explicitly disable this.
17:00:07 <e0ne_> erlon_: great
17:00:13 <jungleboyj> smcginnis:  ++
17:00:15 <smcginnis> Should maybe send to the ML to get attention to it.
17:00:15 <e0ne_> smcginnis: +1
17:00:18 <smcginnis> Times up.
17:00:31 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: thanks for running things.
17:00:38 <smcginnis> Thanks everyone. Sorry we didn't have more time to discuss erlon_, but I think we can continue later.
17:00:45 <smcginnis> #endmeeting