16:00:39 #startmeeting fuel 16:00:40 Meeting started Thu Sep 17 16:00:39 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is xarses. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:41 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:44 The meeting name has been set to 'fuel' 16:00:51 #chair xarses 16:00:52 Current chairs: xarses 16:01:06 Todays Agenda: 16:01:06 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-weekly-meeting-agenda 16:01:10 hi 16:01:12 hi 16:01:12 hi 16:01:14 hi 16:01:16 hi 16:01:20 hi 16:01:52 \o 16:02:02 рш 16:02:04 hi 16:02:07 hi 16:02:25 hi 16:02:26 hi 16:02:51 #topic Fuel at OpenStack Summit (Xarses) 16:03:14 hi 16:03:19 I wanted to get a sense of who's going, If we should have any sessions / work groups 16:03:39 hi 16:03:54 topics everyone is interested in and the like 16:04:48 I'd say proper, scalable multi-rack support would be topic #1 16:05:25 and HA track 16:05:25 my personal favorite is setting up gating CI on openstack-infra 16:05:52 if there are other HA groups, we would need to consider collaboration with those if possible 16:06:21 if there are no large efforts - we should lead one 16:06:49 ok, So I started an etherpad just now 16:06:53 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-mitaka 16:07:31 well, I guess, there is not so many people going to the summit. so should those who go be proxies of others? I think it would be better to raise this dicussion in ML and separate etherpad. It might take more than an hour 16:08:01 what about plugin howto workshop? 16:08:18 kozhukalov_: +1 16:08:25 aglarendil: +1 16:08:32 ya, I will post this to the ML too 16:08:40 In a minute will move along 16:08:48 there are just a few folks, yes. We need to be proxies 16:09:19 openstack-puppet etherpad: 16:09:20 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/HND-puppet 16:09:49 we should participate there as well. aglarendil, other - if you have anything for those guys, let's use xarses as proxy 16:10:35 so are we discussing which sessions/groups we should participate in or about our own Fuel design session at the summit ? 16:11:27 both? 16:11:31 sorry I hajacked, it was about Fuel 16:12:17 but yeah - we'd need to think of both, figure out what sessions it's imprortant to go to and ensure that we go 16:12:50 Ok, lets move along then. I'll follow up on the ML 16:13:06 #topic Elections (angdraug) 16:13:06 let's start this in ML - I think we have have plenty of ideas - but we have not yet sorted most of them 16:13:16 we need an independent election official, 16:13:21 I've asked SergeyLukjanov to run the elections for us 16:13:26 he recommended to separate PTL and component lead elections so that people can't end up with both roles 16:13:50 now we wait for SergeyLukjanov to post a call for self-nominations to openstack-dev 16:14:17 who is going to self nominate? 16:14:35 xarses, angdraug ? 16:14:41 mihgen: angdraug: I have question regarding component lead election procedure. There is no such entity in OpenStack. Is there a clear description of the procedure of CL elections? 16:14:43 so people can self-nomintate like other in openstack-dev do for PTL? 16:14:53 I'll self-nominate for PTL 16:15:08 https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Election_Officiating_Guidelines 16:15:11 aglarendil: ^ 16:15:23 aglarendil: there is no one for CL, but we will use same procedure 16:15:32 unless there are any objections 16:15:33 same process as PTL 16:15:43 the only difference is going to be the list of people who can vote 16:15:50 well, there are lots of procedurial questions 16:16:04 and obviously who can nominate 16:17:09 aglarendil: it's all very straight-forward, see that link above 16:18:08 there's no restriction on who can self-nominate 16:18:21 voters are committers from project's repositories 16:18:24 other OpenStack projects allow self-nominations 16:18:55 the only restriction is that fuel members have to know who that guy is 16:19:02 the recommendation is not to nominate others (only self-nominate) because otherwise it's a headache to confirm that nominee actually wants the job 16:19:59 is not there a restriction that eligible candidate should also be an eligible voter? 16:20:30 I think it would be ok to assume that, but who's going to vote for a random? 16:20:44 xarses: +1 16:21:17 I think having enough people willing to self-nominate is going to be a bigger problem 16:21:33 do we have more volunteers for PTL? for fuel-library CL? for fuel-python CL? 16:22:06 yes, that could be a problem 16:22:19 let's see election announcement first 16:22:38 we could see surprises 16:22:43 I think we may have more volunteers after we send an email about it 16:23:12 well, track down SergeyLukjanov and get him to send it :) 16:23:20 we have some core reviewers on vacation right now or not attending the meeting 16:23:42 yeah, I proposed that we have a 2 week self-nomination period instead of just 1 week to account for that 16:24:53 probably those who do not attend the meeting regularly would not like to be PTL or CL which assumes a lot of community related work 16:25:09 angdraug: he is 1000kms away from me - won't it be easier for you to fly along the meridian through the North Pole? 16:26:02 at least he's in the same time zone ) 16:26:13 moving on? 16:26:21 yep 16:26:37 #topic https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/7.0.x/+bug/1494684 is it critical or not. There is workaround (mkdir). Full solution will be available soon. (kozhukalov) 16:26:40 Launchpad bug 7 in Launchpad itself "Need help for novice translators" [High,Fix released] - Assigned to Данило Шеган (danilo) 16:26:51 This particular bug does not seem to be critical 16:27:01 I'm guessing this is a release blocking bug maybe? 16:27:02 I think we merge the work around and deliver the full solution in updates 16:27:32 there is workaround for it https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224581/ 16:27:43 aglarendil we don't merge workarounds for non critical bugs after HCF 16:27:44 workaround is very trivial and we can get to the release then 16:27:45 * mihgen has to drop, sorry 16:27:49 aglarendil, +1 16:27:58 would it ever accidentaly fill the disk? 16:28:09 maximov: after we merge the workaround we can downgrade it to high 16:28:12 not before 16:28:24 mwhahaha: it may 16:28:26 sorry, but the whole solution requires one more day to make it ready to merge 16:28:28 kozhukalov_ said it is not critical 16:28:43 and then we would need to test it thoroughly 16:28:48 let's decided if it is critical or not 16:28:49 first 16:28:51 maximov: I insist it is critical without a workaround 16:28:57 it can fill the disk 16:28:58 kozhukalov_ ? 16:29:05 these files will never be rotated or compressed 16:29:10 and will never be visible to the user 16:29:15 until it is too late 16:29:30 so, one-line change is worth of saving us the trouble 16:29:34 ok, so i sounds critical then 16:29:38 does upstart write so many logs? 16:29:41 yes 16:29:49 each time you restart a service with upstart 16:29:52 that it could fill the whole disk? 16:29:54 openstack services write to them too 16:29:55 i think 16:30:16 that was the whole point of getting the ability to disable stderr configurations into the puppet scripts 16:30:21 100 bytes in log after every restart ? 16:30:26 i forget who was working on that 16:31:02 maximov: there are not only openstack services 16:31:54 is there anything that prevents us from merging this trivial patch except the priority status of the bug 16:32:00 ? 16:32:25 we need clear explanation re user impact 16:32:29 in the bug 16:32:41 if there is no such things, then let's raise the priority to critical 16:33:00 user impact is obvious - on the long run you will get your root partition filled without ability to recover it easily which may lead to cloud misbehaviour 16:33:01 we need to provide clear explanation why you raised the priority to critical 16:33:28 what is the probability of this scenario ? 16:33:39 since mihgen had to drop off, I guess it falls to me to remind everyone that merging anything at the last moment, even most trivial fixes, is a risk 16:33:40 maximov, aglarendil have just given the explanation 16:33:53 can it wait until 7.0-mu1? 16:33:57 nope 16:34:05 it cannot be easily applied to running nodes 16:34:30 well, it can be - but it is embarassing 16:34:46 aglarendil, -) 16:34:57 do we have any ideas how fast upstart logs are growing ? 16:34:57 should we vote then? 16:35:27 missing logs is data loss if you ask me, we will end up with support calls over it 16:35:49 on my desktop it is just 400K now 16:36:00 i mean du -sh /var/log/upstart 16:36:27 maybe you have logrotate running for these files 16:36:35 400K for what period 16:36:40 maximov, sure 16:36:41 year, week 16:37:11 xarses: missing log is not data loss, but it is a support nightmare, yes 16:37:12 it does not matter, desktop env have nothing in common with servers 16:37:42 the question would be for a controller what is the size of the upstart logs 16:37:47 does upstart write to the log only when it starts/stops the server? 16:37:48 but i can't tell you because i can't see them 16:38:05 server->service 16:38:19 no openstack services may be writing too them 16:38:36 so guys, let's maybe understand first, how serious the problem is 16:38:49 this was the puppet thing i was refering to, https://bugs.launchpad.net/puppet-openstack/+bug/1482564 16:38:50 Launchpad bug 1482564 in puppet-openstack "Puppet modules should have an ability to set use_stderr parameter" [Undecided,Fix committed] - Assigned to Sergey Kolekonov (skolekonov) 16:38:58 angdraug, likely not only when starts/stops services, but when any events come up 16:39:11 so it can be a lot of logs 16:39:29 and without logroate it can run the log partition out of space 16:39:37 angdraug, potentially yes, if for example a serivce flaps 16:39:39 the root partition may run out of space 16:39:44 not the log partition 16:39:51 right. even worse 16:40:12 Hi guys. Yes, I was working on this bug in fuel and in upstream. Services will write all logs with ERR level 16:40:19 root full leads to inability to create devices needed for launching vms, doing network ops, etc.. that's the reason we have a logs partition now 16:40:20 possibility to run / out of space is a critical bug by itself 16:40:34 probably we have there supervisor or something which tries to start service when it falls 16:40:41 if we can't contain our logs, we're just exposing ourselves to unnecessary risk 16:41:17 ok, I see strong consensus in favor of merging kozhukalov_'s workaround 16:41:20 we're breaking upstart because that dir /var/log/upstart in the logs partition is missing, causing upstart to not be able to flip its logs over correctly 16:41:22 what are the risks? 16:41:33 ok, kozhukalov_ did you build custom iso w/ your fix and run some system tests ? 16:42:07 Ok, do we have enough info here? 16:42:17 maximov, not yet 16:42:48 kozhukalov_: how did you test it? 16:43:43 angdraug, have not tested yet, because i was working on the whole correct solution last night 16:43:58 Ok, lets move this to the ML and get to the last topic 16:44:09 i did this small patch just couple hours ago 16:44:33 ok, RC3 build already started 16:45:26 lets move on then 16:45:30 #topic Package updates on fuel-upgade (mattymo/ikalnitsky) 16:45:49 So, ikalnitsky is not here to discuss this 16:46:03 fuel-upgrade (from 6.1 to 7.0) doesn't do a full yum update 16:46:06 please provide your opinion mattymo_ 16:46:23 leaving old packages (kernel, python libs, other system packages) unupdated 16:46:35 it doesn't break anything at the moment, but it really should be done. automatically if possible, I would argue 16:46:37 how it worked previously from 6.0 to 6.1 ? 16:46:55 we didn't update any either 16:47:13 we were 6.5 -> 6.5 centos in that release. for 6.1 to 7.0 it's centos 6.5 to 6.6 16:47:14 slightly too late in the release cycle to bring this up :( 16:47:19 http://paste.openstack.org/show/VDVyrUkVgCUEuSKPaG6X/ this is the ~200 packages of un-updated packages 16:47:21 why we escalating this problem to critical now then ? 16:47:34 because the # is quite large 16:47:48 and now we have a justifiable reason for including this change 16:48:09 is there anything preventing operator from running yum update manually on the fuel node? 16:48:12 no 16:48:15 never ever was 16:48:27 so there's an obvious workaround, ergo not a critical 16:48:41 +1 angdraug 16:48:51 the bug is high if there is a workaround 16:48:57 we just need to document it 16:49:04 ok release notes item it is 16:49:11 yup 16:49:14 mattymo_ +1 thanks 16:49:27 in fuel 7.0 we don't update system packages because we forgot to do it before SCF. run yum update 16:49:55 mattymo_ well, we need to be better next time 16:50:10 maximov, there is an objection from Igor Kalnitsky saying that it _might_ fail 16:50:11 that's it 16:50:25 I pushed previously on this issue and was met with the same answer 16:50:30 in 5.1 in 6.0 and in 6.1 16:51:00 mattymo_ did you always push after HCF ? just in a couple of days before release? 16:51:03 mattymo_: propose a fix for 8.0 and lets merge it early so that we can see how likely it is to fail 16:51:15 angdraug, we're upgrading to centos 7.0 for 8.0, so now it's moot 16:51:22 python 2.7 and the rest 16:51:52 no its not moot 16:52:02 even centos7 gets package updates occasionally :) 16:52:29 let's move along 16:52:43 ok any thing else we need to cover? 16:52:50 #topic open discuss 16:52:57 otherwise we can close early 16:54:05 seems like no on has anything else to raise, thanks guys 16:54:20 #endmeeting