#openstack-manila log

18:33:08 <tbarron> #startmeeting manila
18:33:08 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Mar 19 18:33:08 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is tbarron. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:33:09 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:33:11 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'manila'
18:33:16 <gouthamr> it works!
18:33:25 <tbarron> #topic rc1 bugs
18:34:21 <gouthamr> o/
18:34:25 <tbarron> As announced on openstack-discuss list we're doing a last minute triage of bugs targeted for rc1
18:34:40 <tbarron> The release team already proposed a release for us
18:35:35 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/
18:35:57 <tbarron> It has a -1 because I figure we'll have a fix or two between now and Thursday
18:36:18 <tbarron> so we'll ask that the hash be updated or propose a separate review
18:36:26 <tbarron> Anyways
18:36:38 <tbarron> right now we have these bugs targeted for rc1
18:37:10 <tbarron> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-stein-rc-bugs
18:37:34 <tbarron> Let's consider each of them
18:37:51 <tbarron> 1) is there a fix ready?
18:38:03 <tbarron> 2) if not, would it block our release?
18:38:46 <tbarron> Also, if anyone has any others that they think should be considered, add them to the end of that etherpad
18:39:04 <tbarron> jgrosso: you here?
18:39:13 <jgrosso> yeah
18:39:19 <tbarron> vkmc is in a conflicting meeting
18:39:25 <jgrosso> I need to make a quick call
18:39:29 <tbarron> jgrosso: just getting your presence on record
18:39:29 <vkmc> O/
18:39:31 <vkmc> here!
18:39:33 <tbarron> jgrosso: no prob
18:39:44 <tbarron> vkmc: great
18:40:12 <jgrosso> I have to run get my step son be back in 20 minutes
18:40:49 <tbarron> courtesy ping for others that might want to join: bswartz amito carthaca ganso toabctl
18:41:03 <tbarron> courtesty ping xyang
18:41:22 <tbarron> *courtesy'
18:41:45 <amito> hey...
18:41:58 <tbarron> All: this is a semi-ad hoc meeting w.r.t. rc1 candidate bugs https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-stein-rc-bugs
18:42:10 <tbarron> amito :)
18:42:21 <tbarron> not required of anyone :)
18:42:33 <tbarron> but public and open to all to participate
18:42:54 <tbarron> #link
18:42:54 <tbarron> https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1811680
18:42:55 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1811680 in Manila "Manila allows share type deletion despite quota allocations" [Medium,Fix released] - Assigned to Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr)
18:43:03 <gouthamr> easy, done.
18:43:30 <tbarron> gouthamr: yeah, great
18:43:30 <gouthamr> would like to backport this to stable/pike though, so working on it.. it makes sense for RC1
18:43:40 <gouthamr> s/makes/made :)
18:44:40 * bswartz is in meeting
18:45:12 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1820118
18:45:14 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1820118 in Manila "Manila unexpectedly attempts to delete a share server when deleting a share network" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Carlos Eduardo (silvacarlose)
18:45:17 <tbarron> bswartz: ack
18:45:29 <gouthamr> carlos_silva put up a fix this AM: https://review.openstack.org/644560
18:45:45 <gouthamr> however, it's going to fail tempest tests
18:46:35 <gouthamr> zuul's voted on it.. carlos_silva: do the failures make sense
18:47:16 <gouthamr> carlos_silva: will you need to cleanup managed share servers on these tests?
18:48:21 <tbarron> gouthamr: do you know if it needs dummy driver changes or manila-tempest-plugin changes?
18:48:48 <gouthamr> tbarron: looking at the fix it felt like it needed the tests to invoke share server cleanup at the end of the test
18:49:26 <tbarron> so that might not be a big deal
18:50:23 <tbarron> This is a Medium Importance bug though
18:50:30 <tbarron> Not a blocker.
18:50:58 <tbarron> so carlos_silva I'll leave it targeted for rc-1 but review priority will be best effort.
18:51:26 <tbarron> If you can get it passing tempest soon then there's a pretty good chance we can land it but
18:51:27 <gouthamr> tbarron: ack... it does modify the behavior of the share network API, although only if a "managed share server" exists or a share has been unmanaged from it.. would be nice to get it in
18:51:54 <tbarron> if it's last minute then we'll bump it to train1 and aim for a post-release backport
18:52:06 <gouthamr> s/share has been unmanaged from it/share has been unmanaged from an existing share server
18:52:16 <tbarron> gouthamr: i agree that it would be nice and we should try to help land it
18:52:48 <tbarron> but I'm not going to cut another rc for it
18:53:57 <carlos_silva> ok... I'm also looking at the tests that the fix crashed
18:54:10 <tbarron> carlos_silva: great, and thanks!
18:54:41 <tbarron> #link
18:54:42 <tbarron> https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1777551
18:54:43 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1777551 in Manila "all_tenants value is not handled correctly" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to zhangqing (zhang-qing)
18:54:58 <tbarron> There are two reviews up for this
18:55:12 <tbarron> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/620197/
18:55:12 <lseki> tbarron, gouthamr: would it be solved by modifying every test that unmanages a share, to delete the share server at the end of the test?
18:56:04 <tbarron> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/618991/
18:56:24 <tbarron> We'll come back to this one in a moment
18:56:28 <lseki> (I mean, every test that unmanages a share OR manages a share server)
18:56:52 <gouthamr> lseki: depends, if the share network and share server was created by the test, sure.. else, i think you should handle it in the base class, because there are some test classes where we've implemented persisting the share network
18:57:27 <gouthamr> lseki: yes, the latter case is straightforward - you're managing a share server that was created within a share network that is exclusive to the test
18:59:06 <lseki> gouthamr: ok, I'll also check the base class
18:59:21 <carlos_silva> tbarron: you're welcome :)
18:59:35 <tbarron> :)
19:00:31 <tbarron> Any more on this one now?
19:00:36 <gouthamr> lseki: hmm, just a sec, this can be better... in https://github.com/openstack/manila-tempest-plugin/blob/370569423eea5fad86efd646e7c5ea83e1337420/manila_tempest_tests/tests/api/base.py#L954
19:01:05 <gouthamr> lseki: you could enumerate the share network's share servers and delete all share servers that have "is_auto_deletable=True"
19:02:29 <gouthamr> reach out if you've any issues, i've been in that code path one too many times.. :)
19:02:35 <vkmc> and you have to enable cleanup_in_class
19:03:51 <lseki> gouthamr: I'll give it a try, thanks!
19:03:54 <gouthamr> vkmc: yeah :( therein lies the mess, just as with share types...
19:04:00 <vkmc> yes
19:04:12 <vkmc> I remember that :')
19:04:21 <lseki> vkmc: oh, good point. Thanks :-)
19:04:56 <tbarron> any more on this one?
19:05:00 <gouthamr> vkmc lseki: although the cleanup method i linked should be generic to instance and class cleanups
19:05:02 <gouthamr> tbarron: nope
19:05:16 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1777551
19:05:17 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1777551 in Manila "all_tenants value is not handled correctly" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to zhangqing (zhang-qing)
19:05:22 <tbarron> two reviews up for it
19:05:32 <tbarron> stuck for lack of a release note
19:05:53 <gouthamr> tbarron: oh.. let's fix them up - i'll take a look
19:05:54 <tbarron> This is Medium Importance
19:06:24 <tbarron> gouthamr: I'm thinking maybe all that's needed is the release note but please make sure that the fix seems right.
19:06:34 <tbarron> At first blush it seemed correct.
19:06:35 <gouthamr> tbarron: sure will do
19:06:59 <tbarron> gouthamr: if the fix is wrong we'll re-target this
19:07:05 <gouthamr> ack
19:07:16 <tbarron> but if we just need the release note then let's get it done
19:07:19 <tbarron> gouthamr: thanks!
19:07:57 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1804654
19:07:59 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1804654 in Manila "netapp cdot volume efficiency status error" [Low,In progress] - Assigned to Maurice Escher (maurice-escher)
19:08:18 <tbarron> maybe we still have lseki and carlos_silva here
19:08:33 <carlos_silva> yep, I'm here
19:08:39 <tbarron> carthaca put up a fix for this one
19:08:47 <tbarron> and ganso gave it a +2
19:09:10 <tbarron> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/619570/
19:09:27 <tbarron> It's also missing a release note
19:10:02 <tbarron> If NetApp wants this fix then one of you guys should add the release note, vote +1, and ping gouthamr or myself
19:10:11 <ganso> tbarron: oh noes let me remove my +2
19:10:24 <tbarron> ganso: leave it there
19:10:36 <tbarron> I think the fix looks good
19:10:38 <ganso> will need to add it back anyway on new patchset tbarron
19:10:44 <ganso> tbarron: what about reno?
19:10:46 <carlos_silva> I can do a release note for this fix
19:10:50 <tbarron> ganso: ok, keep your reputation untarnished
19:11:14 <tbarron> carlos_silva: great, carthaca is on family leave so it's up to netapp
19:11:33 <tbarron> ganso: you are right
19:12:02 <carlos_silva> s/I can do/I can create
19:12:08 <tbarron> ok, let's turn this one around today if we all agree all it needs is a reno
19:12:53 <tbarron> #link
19:12:53 <tbarron> https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1810988
19:12:55 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1810988 in Manila "[tempest] migration tests often fail with ssh timeouts " [High,In progress] - Assigned to Tom Barron (tpb)
19:13:08 <tbarron> I won't have a fix for this one in time.
19:13:29 <tbarron> so I plan to retarget it and then we'll have to backport the fixes.
19:13:47 <tbarron> Any discussion :) ?
19:14:14 <gouthamr> nope, sounds good... although the problem seems to be in tempest
19:14:26 <tbarron> Yes
19:14:28 <gouthamr> which isn't branched, although is tagged/released
19:14:39 <tbarron> you are right
19:14:47 <tbarron> so not a matter of backports
19:15:26 <tbarron> I don't know that I should have set it to High priority given that it's not broken functional code.
19:15:45 <tbarron> I just hate seeing red in gate because of it.
19:17:05 <tbarron> #link
19:17:05 <tbarron> https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1804654
19:17:06 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1804654 in Manila "netapp cdot volume efficiency status error" [Low,In progress] - Assigned to Maurice Escher (maurice-escher)
19:17:18 <tbarron> wrong link
19:17:35 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1808127
19:17:37 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1808127 in Manila "intermittent tempest duplicate access rule failure" [Low,Confirmed] - Assigned to Tom Barron (tpb)
19:18:05 <tbarron> And I don't have a fix for this one yet either.  Working on it led me to a more general issue ...
19:19:19 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1818569
19:19:20 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1818569 in Manila "access rule apply races allow duplicates" [Medium,Triaged]
19:19:41 <tbarron> I'll target both to Train-1 so jgrosso can keep them in our sights.
19:20:01 <tbarron> Any discussion?  Disagreement, etc.?
19:20:50 <gouthamr> ack, nope, wasn't introduced recently... sounds like something that can happen with rocky/queens as well
19:21:48 <tbarron> gouthamr: I added a PTG topic cause I think we may need another -ING database state for this but I digress ....
19:22:10 <tbarron> OK, that's the whole list from the etherpad.
19:22:33 <tbarron> Any other bugs that people think we *need* fixes for before rc1 ?
19:23:05 <tbarron> Hearing none, we have three still targeted.
19:23:18 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1820118
19:23:19 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1820118 in Manila "Manila unexpectedly attempts to delete a share server when deleting a share network" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Carlos Eduardo (silvacarlose)
19:23:38 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1777551
19:23:39 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1777551 in Manila "all_tenants value is not handled correctly" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to zhangqing (zhang-qing)
19:24:26 <tbarron> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1804654
19:24:26 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1804654 in Manila "netapp cdot volume efficiency status error" [Low,In progress] - Assigned to Maurice Escher (maurice-escher)
19:25:11 <tbarron> None of these are release blockers, i.e. if we don't merge them by Thursday morning I will retarget them and we won't do an rc-2 because of them.
19:25:22 <gouthamr> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1804654
19:26:20 * gouthamr got disconnected for a sec
19:26:35 <tbarron> gouthamr: Are you figuring it's a low hanging fruit?
19:26:48 <gouthamr> tbarron: the all_tenants one?
19:26:48 <tbarron> gouthamr: needs unit tests, release note, netapp endorsement
19:27:14 <tbarron> gouthamr: no, https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1804654
19:27:15 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1804654 in Manila "netapp cdot volume efficiency status error" [Low,In progress] - Assigned to Maurice Escher (maurice-escher)
19:27:28 <gouthamr> tbarron: oh.. no, sure they can take time to get it in..
19:27:43 <tbarron> has review https://review.openstack.org/619570
19:28:12 <tbarron> if netapp wants to get that one then that's fine but they may have enough stuff to do by Thursday.
19:28:30 <gouthamr> .
19:28:40 <gouthamr> cool tbarron... I'm going to add a backport-potential on the following, since these aren't release blockers, but any fixes would be good to consider for stable branches:
19:28:59 <gouthamr> Manila - Manage rule for CIFS share updates status from "error" to "active" for invalid users - https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1550258
19:29:01 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1550258 in Manila "Manila - Manage rule for CIFS share updates status from "error" to "active" for invalid users" [Low,Triaged]
19:29:06 <gouthamr> Hacking rule for underscore import doesn't work https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1541780.
19:29:08 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1541780 in Manila "Hacking rule for underscore import doesn't work" [Low,In progress] - Assigned to Marc Koderer (m-koderer)
19:29:13 <gouthamr> DB Deadlock on quota reserve https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1518936
19:29:13 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1518936 in Manila "DB Deadlock on quota reserve" [Low,Incomplete]
19:29:18 <gouthamr> requests to SSL wrapped sockets hang while reading using py3 https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1482633
19:29:20 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1482633 in oslo.service "requests to SSL wrapped sockets hang while reading using py3" [High,Triaged]
19:29:24 <gouthamr> Infinidat driver fails pylint https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1816646
19:29:26 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1816646 in Manila "Infinidat driver fails pylint" [Medium,Confirmed] - Assigned to Amit Oren (amito)
19:29:29 <gouthamr> scheduler falsely reports share service down https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1804208
19:29:29 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1804208 in Manila "scheduler falsely reports share service down" [High,New]
19:29:33 <gouthamr> manila scheduler does not filter storage protocol https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1783736
19:29:34 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1783736 in Manila "manila scheduler does not filter storage protocol" [High,In progress] - Assigned to liushi (liu.shi)
19:29:42 <gouthamr> Pagination related issues:
19:29:42 <gouthamr> next share_links contains not supported marker field https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1819167
19:29:43 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1819167 in Manila "next share_links contains not supported marker field " [Medium,Triaged] - Assigned to Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr)
19:29:43 <gouthamr> pagination does not speed up list queries https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1795463
19:29:44 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1795463 in Manila "pagination does not speed up list queries" [Medium,Confirmed]
19:30:09 * gouthamr didn't get banned
19:30:15 <tbarron> gouthamr: :)
19:30:17 <amito> Regarding the infinidat issue
19:30:26 <tbarron> amito: ???
19:30:49 <amito> Infinidat driver pylint issue
19:30:50 <tbarron> amito: you have dust and link in your driver
19:31:00 <amito> ?
19:31:06 <amito> I was afk, sorry
19:31:14 <tbarron> amito: I'm just messing with you :)
19:31:55 <amito> Is this bug critical for rc1? I can maybe suppress the pylint error as a temporary solution...
19:32:10 <tbarron> gouthamr was listing issues whose fixes we'll consider for backports but which are *not* critical for the release.
19:32:23 <gouthamr> amito: just nice to have... since we'll be running the new pylint for stable/stein
19:32:24 <tbarron> amito: and yours was among these
19:32:40 <tbarron> amito: no reason to ruin your evening :)
19:33:03 <amito> Oh sorry, again, it's past my working hours here ;)
19:33:28 <tbarron> amito: I know, sorry to ping you on that one ....
19:33:43 * gouthamr mails a lint remover to amito, next-day-delivery
19:34:27 <amito> tbarron: no problem, sorry for only being half here ;)
19:34:58 <tbarron> So we'll look at doing new stable/branch releases more or less around the time we release Stein
19:35:27 <tbarron> and it will be good to get any serious issue backports in before then.
19:35:53 <tbarron> Also stable/pike will go EOM -- end of maintenance
19:36:10 <tbarron> gouthamr: you have a fix for stable/pike?
19:36:30 <gouthamr> tbarron: i don't yet... backport for stable/queens hasn't merged yet
19:36:42 <tbarron> gouthamr: ack
19:37:07 <tbarron> I have https://review.openstack.org/#/c/635887/ for stable/pike
19:37:28 <tbarron> So in the next couple weeks it would be good to land it.
19:37:45 <tbarron> Anything else for today?
19:38:18 <tbarron> OK, thanks all!
19:38:23 <tbarron> #endmeeting