14:00:53 <abhishekk> #startmeeting glance
14:00:53 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Thu Apr 21 14:00:53 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is abhishekk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:53 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:53 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'glance'
14:01:08 <abhishekk> #topic roll call
14:01:14 <abhishekk> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda
14:01:15 <dansmith> p/ (yay DST)
14:01:17 <abhishekk> o/
14:01:26 <rosmaita> o/
14:01:27 <mrjoshi> o/
14:01:42 <abhishekk> pranali and cyril are not around
14:01:59 <abhishekk> just wait couple of minutes more before we start
14:02:15 <jokke_> o/
14:02:17 <pslestang> o/
14:02:19 <alistarle> o/
14:02:28 <abhishekk> lets start
14:02:41 <abhishekk> #topic release/periodic jobs update
14:02:48 <abhishekk> Milestone 1 is 4 weeks away
14:02:54 <abhishekk> most of the specs are up for review
14:03:05 <abhishekk> we will walk through them in next section
14:03:27 <abhishekk> Periodic job, all is green except newly added fips job which has failed
14:03:45 <dansmith> I thought it was working?
14:04:21 <abhishekk> it is failing intermittently
14:04:36 <abhishekk> current execution failed while the previous one has passed
14:04:38 <dansmith> okay, do you have a link handy to a failed run?
14:04:46 <dansmith> if not I'll go dig it up
14:05:02 <abhishekk> https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/88b4b25744234bc2ad89cb97525970a7
14:05:07 <dansmith> thanks
14:05:12 <abhishekk> np
14:05:16 <abhishekk> moving ahead
14:05:24 <dansmith> more volume fails ugh
14:05:30 <abhishekk> yes
14:05:35 <abhishekk> #topic Specs for review
14:05:58 <abhishekk> I have added 1st draft for API for Instant caching of an Image
14:06:09 <abhishekk> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance-specs/+/838642
14:06:29 <abhishekk> Expanding store details - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance-specs/+/835606
14:06:29 <abhishekk> Delete API for metadef resource types - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance-specs/+/818192
14:06:29 <abhishekk> spec-lite: ability to purge all rows by glance-manage - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance-specs/+/819622 (one +2)
14:06:36 <dansmith> ah cool I need to look at that
14:07:02 <abhishekk> Last one is we agreed on last PTG but it is moved to this cycle
14:07:25 <abhishekk> So all members, kindly review the spec and give your suggestions
14:07:35 <abhishekk> moving to next topic
14:07:47 <abhishekk> #topic Secure RBAC
14:08:07 <abhishekk> We are yet to get updates from Policy Popup team about our queries
14:08:36 <abhishekk> meanwhile taking reference of rosmaita's work, pranali has prepared a glance policy matrix for us
14:08:44 <abhishekk> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance/+/838857
14:09:06 <abhishekk> Kindly go through it and verify whether we are mapping it correctly or not
14:09:47 <rosmaita> nice
14:09:48 <abhishekk> moving forward;
14:10:06 <abhishekk> slowly we are learning from you :D
14:10:25 <abhishekk> #topic glance-download import method
14:10:35 <abhishekk> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance-specs/+/836132
14:10:55 <abhishekk> pslestang, alistarle There are bunch of suggestions on the spec
14:11:05 <dansmith> I was not aware we were re-discussing this at this meeting or I would have re-reviewed the spec earlier
14:11:23 <rosmaita> yeah, i have not looked at it yet either
14:11:46 <alistarle> Yeah we answer couple of the comment
14:11:47 <pslestang> abhishekk: yes we read them
14:11:54 <alistarle> thanks for the review btw
14:11:55 <abhishekk> sorry for that, this was decided last meeting but dansmith you were not around
14:12:11 <dansmith> ah, okay yeah sorry
14:12:15 <abhishekk> and I failed to update it this week
14:13:20 <abhishekk> alistarle, pslestang summary is only copying data from another glance is not useful
14:14:09 <abhishekk> So if you guys think we can have a virtual discussion for this topic, sometime next week
14:14:52 <alistarle> So you all agreed that copying metadata is a minimal requirement for the spec right ?
14:15:04 <dansmith> as I said before, I'm also happy to put my money where my mouth is and help with getting the metadata bits right, although I think alistarle's comment made it sound like he was pretty on top of it
14:15:21 <dansmith> alistarle: it is, IMHO.. at least hw_* and os_* things
14:15:50 <abhishekk> os_* but not os_glance_*, right?
14:16:02 <dansmith> it was good to get feedback from sean because he does a lot of nova stuff with required traits and numa instances and things that are likely to have those bits set and not work without them
14:16:22 <abhishekk> ++
14:16:23 <dansmith> abhishekk: yeah, the os_ things that control stuff in nova like whether or not it's a windows image, which requires other things to be turned on in the hypervisor, etc
14:16:41 <abhishekk> ack
14:17:05 <dansmith> alistarle: pslestang: there's not code posted for this yet right?
14:17:16 <pslestang> not right now
14:17:29 <dansmith> okay
14:17:35 <abhishekk> sean has also pointed out some swift example
14:17:38 <pslestang> but we have some code that works that I can push as a WIP
14:17:54 <abhishekk> that will be good to see
14:18:08 <dansmith> abhishekk: the swift temporary url thing, yeah, that's exactly that I was proposing for being able to do this without federation
14:18:08 <pslestang> abhishekk: acked
14:18:39 <pslestang> I think it will overlap jokke_ stuff
14:18:42 <abhishekk> dansmith, yeah, will have a look at it and we can see how feasible it is for us
14:18:47 <pslestang> about import/export
14:18:51 <alistarle> dansmith: yeah we talk a bit about it in the spec, but I think it is far more complicated to achieve
14:19:09 <dansmith> abhishekk: I'm not saying we need to hang up the glance-download stuff on export/temp-url, to be clear
14:19:22 <abhishekk> yep, me neither
14:19:28 <dansmith> alistarle: export you mean? yeah, I'm not saying we hold this up for that
14:20:12 <dansmith> alistarle: but with that sort of temp-url export, all the work you do here will be applicable in that case too, just via a dedicated url instead.. the image show and download will work the same, just no token required
14:20:32 <jokke_> Like I've mentioned before ... the export would really have been useful addition ot this work. Definitely not the other way around
14:20:59 <alistarle> Oh yeah I see, yes we totally agree, but like plestang said it is more a topic related to export work we talk with jokke_
14:21:26 <alistarle> But we'll rely on it when it will be ready for sure
14:21:36 <dansmith> there's also a little bit of terminology confusion here:
14:21:47 <jokke_> yeah. Also the swift use case was in the initial Interoperable Image Import spec, never implemented as no-one saw real push/value for that
14:22:06 <abhishekk> really?
14:22:11 <dansmith> the temp-url thing I was referring to was more like "take-out" which provides a way to have a non-trusted user access a single image without a user account..
14:22:25 <dansmith> "export" being more what jokke_ was talking about where we bundle image and metadata in one file
14:22:37 <jokke_> yeah, that was basically Rackspace and once they moved away from active development, no-one else stepped up saying it would be useful
14:22:38 <dansmith> export can be used by a regular user or via the take-out,
14:22:49 <dansmith> and glance-download could use export if not authenticated via federation
14:23:23 <abhishekk> ack
14:23:30 <dansmith> sorry
14:23:37 <dansmith> glance-download could use take-out if not federated
14:23:39 <alistarle> Hmm yeah agree, it is 3 different topic indeed, but who can be interconnected
14:23:42 <dansmith> man, I need to write it down somewhere :P
14:23:55 <pslestang> dansmith: ok agree with that and thanks for your clarification
14:23:56 <abhishekk> definitely
14:24:12 <dansmith> alistarle: I can write up a summary of the three not on the spot in irc if you want,
14:24:23 <dansmith> and we can refer to that when we get confused again, if it would help
14:24:27 <dansmith> just as a sort of potential road map
14:24:30 <abhishekk> ++
14:24:56 <alistarle> Yep, especially if we want to implement them in following cycle
14:25:11 <abhishekk> Also I think we can have one follow up virtual session to finalize the work items
14:25:14 <dansmith> yeah, if nothing else, just a "if we're going to do this, we should do it this way" sort of thing
14:25:23 <dansmith> like jokke_'s draft export spec that isn't planned to be done right away
14:26:17 <abhishekk> makes sense
14:26:23 <alistarle> Great, so what is the status for this glance-download spec then ?
14:26:57 <jokke_> I think abhishekk had plan to get it worked on once the spec is good to go (so yeah in that light within this group, not in next few cycles)
14:27:10 <dansmith> I think there's a lot of comments in there to address, put in more detail about the namspaces we're going to copy, behavior of if the format is a mismatch,
14:27:24 <dansmith> and I think it would be good to document what the client behavior is going to be, as sean brought up confusion there
14:27:33 <dansmith> alistarle: ^
14:28:15 <abhishekk> jokke_, I will be happy to work on it, if the approach is finalized before Milestone 2
14:28:15 <alistarle> Ok so let's talk about this metadata, because it was not clear in the PTG, and we needed to talk about it here
14:28:53 <abhishekk> go ahead
14:29:12 <jokke_> yeah, I think there is lots of mixup happening in the spec comments due to that too
14:30:24 <alistarle> last status during the PTG was to not include the metadata at all, to keep it simple as a first step
14:30:35 <jokke_> ++
14:31:03 <alistarle> And in the spec it seems we need to include them, so the question are:
14:31:03 <dansmith> that's not how we left it when I was there...
14:31:25 <abhishekk> alistarle, that was not the decision, I said I will decide whether we should include hw_ properties or not in later week after PTG
14:32:27 <alistarle> abhishekk: yes you're right
14:33:07 <abhishekk> yeah, and looking at comments from nova team, just copying the data is not enough and not a good user experience
14:33:18 <dansmith> since we had that discussion I've done some more (but not a comprehensive) survey of the critical properties, and hw_ os_ and probably trait: are pretty critical to copy I think
14:33:46 <alistarle> If we need to include the hw_ properties, do you think we need to include it inside the glance-download plugin ? make it configurable in the json ? or enforce which metadata we copy in the glance configuration ?
14:34:31 <dansmith> I think always copying those namespaces is fine, no config or option in the request is fine and the simplest to implement
14:34:41 <jokke_> I think the comments on the spec tell quite clear story how confusing the metadata part makes this whole feature. And also it being extended on every round of discussion making it even more mess in everyone's heads
14:34:49 <dansmith> as noted I would *like* to also take a list of other namespaces to copy, but not critical like hw_ os_ etc
14:35:57 <alistarle> dansmith: we also need to update the container_format and disk_format to match the source image right ?
14:36:03 <jokke_> and no, it definitely should not be done by the internal plugin that does the data transfer
14:36:04 <dansmith> there's a lot of back and forth in the spec, but I don't think I see any arguing or confusion over the metadata like hw_* being important to copy
14:36:18 <dansmith> alistarle: update or reject, I'm not sure I have a strong opinion either way
14:36:57 <abhishekk> I think update should be the right approach
14:37:04 <alistarle> dansmith: we already do it in the image conversion plugin, so I think update is OK, and we can even re-update if needed later in the image conversion plugin
14:37:06 <dansmith> alistarle: sounded like you preferred update, which is fine with me.. definitely easier for the user
14:37:35 <dansmith> alistarle: it also means the client can just create the image with any value for those, and let the plugin override them so they're correct, which is much nicer for the user
14:37:47 <dansmith> like, bare/raw and let it be updated to match
14:38:15 <alistarle> Yep, that looks good to me
14:38:44 <dansmith> cool
14:38:53 <pslestang> and do we add an option to let the customer add his own metadata?
14:39:12 <dansmith> pslestang: add his own keys or his own namespaces?
14:39:43 <alistarle> it can be a regex of keys
14:39:52 <alistarle> so it match keys and namespaces
14:39:58 <jokke_> pslestang: no
14:40:22 <dansmith> alistarle: sure that works...
14:40:47 <abhishekk> why no, any specific reason?
14:42:06 <pslestang> jokke_: I defnitely think that we should rely on your export spec, but for the first version of glance-download we need to have a solution that is ok for everyone
14:43:02 <jokke_> I think we should either consistently let the user to take care of their metadata or import all we can. Expecting user to write regexp as input to client is turning this same mess the old tasks api was already where we expected json as input from user and that got abandoned as whole due to that
14:43:58 <alistarle> Ok so let's hardcode the namespace and that's it, right ?
14:44:08 <dansmith> we're not expecting a user to write a regex,
14:44:21 <dansmith> we're allowing them to if they have other keys to copy, other than the ones we know need to be copied
14:44:26 <jokke_> pslestang: remember that this is stable API we're talking about. We do it one way now, we're stuck with it. We don't break the api consistently and excuse that to microversions
14:45:55 <pslestang> jokke_: yeah understood
14:46:10 <alistarle> jokke: I agree we you, we need to take care of the API, so if we are not sure of the solution, let's not touch it
14:46:56 <alistarle> And as we agree the definitive solution will be related to export stuff or other patch, I propose to hardcode it, so it is easier to move in future patch
14:47:45 <dansmith> alistarle: I think there's a majority of people here who agree on most of the elements of a direction, so I'd say revise the spec to get us closer to that, address/resolve all the existing comments and we can go from there
14:48:02 <abhishekk> +1
14:48:24 <dansmith> it'll be easier to iterate and discuss a concrete thing than a thing plus a diff of a bunch of comments and discussion
14:48:39 <abhishekk> and also if you think you are stuck in some part feel free to ping us
14:49:19 <alistarle> great, clear for me
14:49:38 <abhishekk> cool
14:49:55 <abhishekk> moving to open discussion
14:50:00 <abhishekk> #topic Open discussion
14:50:19 <abhishekk> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance/+/838822
14:50:24 <abhishekk> Update migration constant
14:50:45 <abhishekk> Kindly review the patch, easy one and important one
14:51:27 <abhishekk> Also I think pranali has forget to include export draft in review list
14:51:42 <abhishekk> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance-specs/+/837127
14:51:48 <jokke_> abhishekk: is that ^^ the alembic thingie we need to do every cycle?
14:51:55 <abhishekk> jokke_, yep
14:52:48 <jokke_> gating
14:52:54 <abhishekk> cool, thank you
14:53:15 <abhishekk> dansmith, I am also not aware but looks like alembic migration depends on that
14:53:31 <dansmith> abhishekk: I don't think the other projects have to do this sort of thing
14:53:42 <jokke_> it's part of how the migration scripts gets picked up iirc
14:53:56 <abhishekk> they might have implemented the script execution differently
14:54:25 <abhishekk> Something in our glance-db-manage needs to be fixed
14:54:33 <dansmith> abhishekk: clearly they did, I'm just saying it seems like maybe something we could resolve
14:54:39 <jokke_> I think glance was the first one that got implemented and some of the inconveniences were quite quickly picked up and done differently elsewhere
14:54:46 <abhishekk> ++
14:54:58 <abhishekk> dansmith, agree
14:55:33 <abhishekk> Nothing else form me
14:55:40 <abhishekk> last 5 minutes
14:55:51 <jokke_> I think it's one of the things that 10min of work every year has not yet warranted anyone dig deep enough into it to change the beaviour :P
14:56:04 <dansmith> right :)
14:56:46 <abhishekk> :D, lets change it this cycle
14:57:17 <abhishekk> anything else guys?
14:57:33 <jokke_> I'm pretty sure you could tie it to pbr somehow
14:57:37 <jokke_> not from me
14:58:03 <abhishekk> cool, lets wrap up
14:58:06 <abhishekk> thank you all!
14:58:12 <abhishekk> have a nice weekend o/
14:58:34 <abhishekk> #endmeeting