15:01:02 #startmeeting manila 15:01:02 Meeting started Thu Aug 27 15:01:02 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gouthamr. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:03 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:01:05 The meeting name has been set to 'manila' 15:01:13 o/ 15:01:14 yoo 15:01:20 o/ 15:01:20 o/ 15:01:28 hi 15:01:32 courtesy ping: ganso dviroel lseki carloss tbarron felipe_rodrigues 15:01:35 o/ 15:01:41 hi 15:01:43 o/ 15:01:44 hello o/ 15:02:00 o/ 15:02:12 thank you for joining, regular agenda today: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila/Meetings#Next_meeting 15:02:17 lets get started 15:02:19 #topic Announcements 15:02:50 i'm a bit confused there, today's not feature proposal freeze, that was last week :) 15:03:04 Feature Freeze for this cycle is in 2 weeks 15:03:21 we'll also be requesting client library releases (python-manilaclient, manila-ui) on Sep 10th 2020 15:03:27 #link https://releases.openstack.org/victoria/schedule.html (victoria release schedule) 15:04:12 so we should be reviewing and merging feature patches, and any follow up client changes between now and then.. 15:04:32 we'll discuss the reviews in a bit 15:05:24 i'll be away from my computer for a few days starting Sep 2nd 15:05:51 i'd like to seek a volunteer to run this meeting next week (sep 3rd) 15:06:59 sep 7th is labor day; and a long weekend in the US, so its possible more folks will be away the previous week, or the week of sep 7th (our feature freeze week) 15:07:21 bad timing i know :) but, i don't plan on keeping reviews pending till then 15:08:38 so, any volunteers? (anyone looking to get some meeting running experience?) 15:08:52 o/ 15:09:14 dviroel: ty, you're it :) 15:09:15 dviroel ++ 15:09:21 dviroel++ 15:09:21 dviroel ++ 15:10:02 great; that's the couple of announcements we had for today 15:10:46 dviroel: did you have a date/time for our review meeting? 15:11:04 gouthamr: for the collab review? 15:11:09 yep 15:11:20 gouthamr: yes, September 1st, 5:00 PM - 7:00 PM (UTC) 15:11:32 just added to the review etherpad 15:11:57 ah, nice, thank you - so we'll talk about that in a bit 15:12:32 in other news, the forum topic submission begins this weekend 15:12:43 please place your ideas in this etherpad: 15:12:46 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-wallaby-forum-brainstorm 15:12:55 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-August/016581.html (Forum planning) 15:13:56 any other announcements today? 15:14:13 #topic Reviews needing attention 15:14:45 we're happy to revive (and enthusiastically adhere to) our review etherpad 15:14:49 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-victoria-review-focus (review focus ether pad) 15:15:02 lets go down some items on the list 15:15:22 thanks for filling it in! 15:15:38 Share Server Migration 15:16:05 dviroel: you want to tell us about the collab review we intend to do? 15:16:15 gouthamr: sure 15:16:48 so, in sep 1st we are going to do a call for a collab review through Share Server Migration feature 15:17:13 the idea is to explain the more important changes and implementation decisions 15:17:37 we shall also going through the code and explain what we are doing on each part 15:17:58 the idea is to help reviewers to understand everything that is being proposed 15:18:22 instead of waiting for questions on the change itself 15:18:44 if we have time, we can also show it working with one the the drivers 15:19:00 dummy/container/NetApp 15:19:31 +1 - it's been really helpful to do a high touch review synchronously on large features like this in the past 15:20:12 +1 15:20:38 I tried to find a suitable time for the reviewers that participated in the last collab review 15:20:39 #link https://everytimezone.com/?t=5f4d8f00,3fc (meeting time in your time zone) 15:22:13 dviroel: can you please send the meeting invite to the openstack-discuss ML ; i am unsure who else would be interested to participate, but there may be some that don't attend these irc meetings 15:22:33 gouthamr: sure, will do, today 15:23:15 either case, we should plan on recording the session, so feel free to use a meeting platform that lets you do that - i can volunteer my bluejeans room in case 15:24:01 to drive thorough discussions, reviewers, please take a look at the changes dviroel has indicated on the etherpad 15:24:42 and prepare your questions - ofcourse we don't need to wait; we do want to reflect all questions on the review eventually 15:24:57 +1 15:25:07 .. so you can post them right away if you don't want to hold them until the meeting.. 15:25:28 thanks for all the hard work, dviroel andrebeltrami and reviewers that have already started taking a look 15:25:56 i suppose [NetApp] Add support for share server migration is in the same thread, so lets move on to "[NetApp] Enables configuring NFS transfer limits" 15:26:11 this has an impact in the share manager 15:26:22 #link https://review.opendev.org/746361/ (Add the share-type for the server setup metadata) 15:27:02 ty for the reviews dviroel carthaca 15:27:21 #link https://review.opendev.org/746568/ is the follow up driver change 15:28:07 this is going to conflict with the other driver change, so it will be good to merge this one sooner, so I can fix the conflicts earlier 15:28:25 other driver change: share server migration for netapp driver 15:28:34 ack, any reviewers that would like to volunteer? 15:29:18 * gouthamr don't all of you speak at once :) 15:29:28 :) 15:29:54 I'll review it anyway :) 15:30:07 I'll help with it as well 15:30:14 thank you dviroel vkmc 15:30:15 not a NetApp expert though 15:30:16 tks vkmc 15:31:51 vkmc: ack, its easy they tell everyone - deploy and forget sorts 15:32:08 next up, [NetApp] Adding support for Adaptive QoS 15:32:20 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740532/ 15:32:36 already has a couple of reviewers, would you like to update status, dviroel/carloss? 15:33:27 oh you folks are okay with the change by the looks of it 15:33:40 cool, i can take a look at this 15:33:48 lets move on... "add share server update to manila-manage share update_host" 15:33:49 ty gouthamr :) 15:33:50 gouthamr: I'm planning to place my final vote soon 15:34:10 ack 15:34:17 #link https://review.opendev.org/731486/ 15:35:12 a simple change ^ already has a +2 15:35:51 if anyone's willing to review, please do.. we'll move to the last one 15:35:55 "Graduate share replication feature" 15:36:01 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:bp/graduate-share-replication-feature+(status:open+OR+status:merged) 15:36:11 carloss++ 15:36:19 made it just in time for feature proposal freeze, carloss 15:36:55 gouthamr: yep :) 15:37:14 cool, i'll take a look at this one 15:37:20 me too 15:37:28 thanks dviroel 15:37:32 thanks gouthamr dviroel 15:38:43 we didn't discuss reviewers for the "Share Server Migration" feature patches, but, i assume multiple people are going to be involved, since we'll be doing a collabreview 15:39:19 any other items on the etherpad (or elsewhere) that we need to pay attention to, between today and next week? 15:39:52 any other concerns with reviews in general? 15:40:38 hearing none, we'll move on to some triage: 15:40:42 # Bugs (vhari) 15:40:49 o/ vhari 15:40:55 gouthamr, \o 15:41:08 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1782837 15:41:13 Launchpad bug 1782837 in OpenStack Shared File Systems Service (Manila) "test_create_delete_ro_access_rule fails on the dummy driver" [Undecided,New] 15:41:29 diving into ^^ :D 15:41:45 we've hit this recently too 15:41:51 old bug looking for next steps .. 15:42:46 gouthamr, good to know , will be helpful to add info from recent event to the bug 15:43:06 the tempest test in question is testing the state of a newly created access rule 15:43:45 the "problem" here is by the time the access-create returns, the access rule's already picked up in the share manager which transitions the status 15:44:42 so, its not really a problem, all i suspect is that the operation is fast, and nobody should complain about that :) 15:44:55 :D 15:46:01 we should confirm this theory, and if its true, we can tag this bug low-hanging-fruit, and "low" 15:46:31 we have some upcoming bugsquash opportunities (ghc, post-m3-bugsquash) where we can address this one 15:46:49 +1 15:46:50 sounds good 15:46:55 gouthamr: so would the fix be to adjust tempest to allow for the fast transition state and consider that acceptable? 15:47:04 tbarron: yes 15:47:20 ok, thanks for explaining 15:47:43 onto next 15:47:47 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1823750 15:47:49 Launchpad bug 1823750 in Cinder "WsgiLimiterProxy code looks suspect" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Rajat Dhasmana (whoami-rajat) 15:48:03 heh 15:48:15 a fix was proposed - 15:48:26 and abandoned 15:48:35 yeah, i think i caused that :P 15:48:38 looping back 15:48:47 so, i don't think this is a bug 15:49:33 the manila code in question is here 15:49:35 #link https://opendev.org/openstack/manila/src/commit/dceced6d6eaa78ace3b62af843e09c7e3e6f7588/manila/api/v1/limits.py#L424 15:50:29 this is in an arcane middleware component called WsgiLimiterProxy; where someone could in-theory set up a proxy to handle api rate limits against manila-api 15:50:58 i say in-theory, because i don't believe we've documented this feature 15:51:09 but that's unrelated to this bug 15:51:41 the idea is to hit the proxy and ask if the user API request to manila should be refused because there's rate limiting 15:52:23 so if the proxy responds with a [200-299) code 15:52:35 we know there's no need to limit the API request 15:53:02 so fwiw, the code is correct, not suspect .. 15:53:17 gouthamr, ack .. 15:53:40 any other thoughts on this? 15:53:41 although, does it work? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ we need to test this proxy feature 15:54:32 we do test the in-tree limiter 15:55:17 and we have documented how to use it 15:57:21 #link https://docs.openstack.org/manila/latest/admin/shared-file-systems-quotas.html#limits (how to use the rate limiter) 15:57:47 i vote to close it out with this explanation as "Invalid" 15:58:18 +1 15:58:27 gouthamr, ack 15:59:01 anyone disagrees with the verdict? 15:59:08 gouthamr: is it your view that manila is different than cinder in this regard? or do you think your clemson brethren in cinder made the wrong call? 15:59:37 * tbarron doesn't know much about this wsgi stuff ... 16:00:12 but recommends cross-project dialog in such cases 16:00:36 tbarron: :P yeah, i'll respond and let eharney ask questions 16:00:50 --time check-- 16:01:08 sorry to cut this off, vhari - i'll handle this bug :) 16:01:13 thanks everyone for attending 16:01:17 we're one minute over 16:01:20 gouthamr, sure ty 16:01:22 lets continue on #openstack-manila 16:01:26 #endmeeting