15:00:14 #startmeeting manila 15:00:15 Meeting started Thu Feb 8 15:00:14 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is carloss. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:15 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:15 The meeting name has been set to 'manila' 15:00:22 hi 15:00:30 hi 15:00:34 hi 15:00:35 courtesy ping: dviroel gouthamr msaravan pulluri 15:00:37 hi 15:00:42 o/ 15:01:00 hi 15:01:26 o/ 15:01:59 hi 15:03:19 o/ hello everyone 15:03:38 our meeting agenda for today: 15:03:40 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila/Meetings#Next_meeting 15:03:48 #topic Announcements 15:03:55 Schedule and Deadlines: 15:04:00 #link https://releases.openstack.org/caracal/schedule.html 15:04:35 Hi 15:05:10 * carloss waves at msaravan 15:05:49 so we're 3 weeks away from feature freeze 15:07:07 and we're 1 week past feature proposal freeze 15:07:15 is there a feature you're still willing to propose to gerrit? 15:07:53 I think it would be important for reviewers to get started with the changes 15:08:12 we can try to do something as we did in the past: merge things as early as we can 15:08:43 i have spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/manila-specs/+/898999, but I dont think implementation will be merged by freeze 15:09:08 I think gireesh and jayaanand are pursuing two features... do you have updates? :) 15:09:34 > i have spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/manila-specs/+/898999, but I dont think implementation will be merged by freeze 15:09:34 kpdev: yeah, I think we're short in time to merge the spec and get the implementation merged for this cycle 15:09:55 we can continue pursuing the spec though and merge it as early as we can, and then we can have the implementation coming on the next cycle 15:10:06 I got few comment from Goutham, need some time to incorporate those. will push my changes by Tuesday 15:11:03 Basically, Gireesh is trying to put backup_type to manila.conf which is requested by gouthamr and also acknowledged earlier by carthaca 15:12:00 So, that's in progress right now.. carloss ; @gireesh you want to share the etherpad link here , so that other folks can refer 15:12:39 https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-share-backup 15:12:43 I will submit my change tomorrow 15:13:22 msaravan gireesh jayaanand: thank you for sharing! :) 15:13:57 thanks @carloss 15:15:00 thank you! @carloss 15:15:29 awesome, ty 15:15:46 that's all I had in terms of announcements 15:15:52 do you have an announcement to share with us? 15:17:19 thank you carloss . .. On NetApp CI, DHSS=False suite is passing and only one used to fail. I have the setup fix ready, and I'll incorporate that. For DHSS=True suite, I am triaging them suite by suite, and hoping to fix them soon. 15:19:06 msaravan: great news 15:19:12 thanks for letting us know 15:19:29 having third party CI voting on the changes is very important for us 15:20:21 thank you. ack. 15:20:38 so we appreciate the efforts to have it working :) 15:21:43 #topic Review Focus 15:22:41 so continuing to talk about third party drivers, it's been a while since we don't check the ones that are reporting CI 15:23:10 the Tegile driver is one of them, and it is not reporting the CI outputs for a while now 15:23:24 so tkajinam proposed a deprecation warning to the driver 15:23:26 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/manila/+/907377 15:23:55 and we'll be looking closely at other drivers that are not reporting CI results and didn't have maintainers around for a while 15:25:14 I'll attempt reaching out and mention that, but I think we will end up adding deprecation warnings to a some drivers 15:25:52 I'll keep bringing it up in the future 15:26:14 +1 if we round up all such drivers, we can add one release note mentioning them all and send an email to openstack-discuss seeking maintainers to rectify them. 15:28:08 ++ 15:28:36 so for review focus we have merged a couple of things 15:28:50 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-caracal-review-focus (Caracal review focus etherpad) 15:30:21 a couple of fixes still need some reviews 15:30:56 kpdev_: I intend to have an initial review in the deferred deletion change soon... thank you for working on this feature 15:31:20 I saw there was still some conversations in the spec between you and gouthamr 15:31:48 maybe we can take those to the implementation when possible :) 15:32:27 we need some more reviewers in the deferred deletion spec though... anyone willing to volunteer? 15:33:07 yes, few of the suggestions added in implementation 15:34:10 great :) 15:34:45 ashrodri jayaanand msaravan gireesh: can I have your eyes on the deferred deletion patches? 15:34:55 yes, will do it carloss 15:34:58 sure 15:35:34 tyvm :D 15:37:21 that's all I had for review focus... is there another change you'd like to bring up? 15:37:33 * carloss remembers the paramiko conditional import 15:37:45 would be nice if we could have some extra eyes here ^ as well 15:39:48 alright 15:39:52 next topic... 15:40:12 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-bug-triage-pad-new (Bug Triage etherpad) 15:40:17 grr 15:40:20 :) 15:40:21 #topic Bug Triage 15:40:28 ty carloss 15:40:28 vhari: floor is yours :D 15:40:34 :D 15:40:43 let's dive in then 15:40:45 nk https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/2051877 15:41:34 do we know if this is a regression 15:42:04 and pls provide logs if still available 15:42:10 I think this is a complicated thing and I tested something similar in the past 15:42:20 the steps to reproduce would likely be important 15:42:27 in the scenario I tested in the past, I: 15:43:28 - created a share, using a share type that had snapshot support but didn't have create share from snapshot support 15:43:28 - modified the share type and set create share from snapshot support to True 15:43:28 - attempted to create a share from snapshot 15:43:35 I think this was the case I tried and failed 15:43:50 but it's a thing from yeeeears ago 15:45:18 so that's why I'm curious... did this share type already had create share from snapshot support set to True when the share was created? 15:47:00 The scheduler doesn’t cache anything about a share type… so that scenario shouldn’t occur ^ 15:48:05 this scenario should be easy to test, so I could try to re-reproduce 15:48:32 but if there was something wrong, after all this years, I think there's a chance this has changed 15:48:46 but I think for this bug specifically, would be nice to ask for some scheduler logs 15:48:51 and the steps to reproduce 15:50:15 any other suggestions? :) 15:50:42 I'll ping in the bug 15:50:53 carloss++ 15:51:06 next up 15:51:08 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/2049528 15:52:27 is this reproducible? if so pls provide recreate steps and logs if available 15:53:10 "2024-01-12 20:59:38.489 7 ERROR oslo_messaging.rpc.server sqlalchemy.exc.InvalidRequestError: Entity namespace for "coalesce(anon_1.share_gigabytes, :coalesce_1)" has no property "topic"" 15:53:17 curious 🤔 15:54:45 since this scheduler driver is turned off by default, I wouldn’t doubt it to be untested/broken. I think having a cephfs backend has little to do with this… 15:56:19 vhari: I can pick this up; priority can be medium; and we can target rc1 … I’ll try to reproduce it, if i can’t, I’ll pose some questions 15:56:41 gouthamr++ ack 15:56:47 ++ 15:56:53 ty gouthamr 15:57:05 so that's all the time we have for bugs today folks 15:57:14 thanks for pitching in as always 15:58:01 tyvm for bringing up these bugs vhari 15:58:06 yw carloss 15:58:13 alright, let's wrap up 15:58:18 thank you for joining 15:58:23 let's get back to #openstack-manila 15:58:28 #endmeeting