15:01:30 <rhochmuth> #startmeeting monasca
15:01:31 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Oct  5 15:01:30 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is rhochmuth. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:01:33 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:01:35 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'monasca'
15:01:43 <rhochmuth> o/
15:01:46 <haad1> hey
15:01:48 <Kamil__> o/
15:01:48 <rbak> o/
15:01:51 <pratid> hi
15:01:52 <cbellucci> o/
15:01:55 <witek> hi
15:01:59 <shinya_kwbt> o/
15:01:59 <koji> o/
15:02:00 <rhochmuth> i just tried starting the meeting in the moansca room
15:02:01 <bklei> o/
15:02:04 <rhochmuth> and no one was there
15:02:07 <hosanai> o/
15:02:19 <rhochmuth> hello everyone
15:02:24 <rhochmuth> o/
15:02:29 <Trpger> what's up
15:02:36 <haad1> so let's start :)
15:02:40 <Fdaisuke> o/
15:02:49 <rhochmuth> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/monasca-team-meeting-agenda
15:02:57 <rhochmuth> Agenda for Wednesday October 5, 2016 (15:00 UTC)
15:02:57 <rhochmuth> 1.	monasca-statsd (stable) and monasca-agent out of sync
15:02:57 <rhochmuth> 1.	https://github.com/openstack/monasca-statsd/commit/c4bbfa665df15e57b73381b2467e214c4e04a70a
15:02:57 <rhochmuth> 2.	https://github.com/openstack/monasca-agent/commit/feb0a83bd9011bac4d7c6e85afef59d0f1fdb7f5
15:02:57 <rhochmuth> 3.	2016-09-26 08:40:13 GMT-2 | WARNING | statsd | monasca_agent.statsd.udp(udp.py:111) | metric type ms not supported.
15:02:58 <rhochmuth> 2.	Status of openstack-ansible-os_monasca  role and merging fixes
15:02:58 <rhochmuth> 3.	Reviews
15:02:59 <rhochmuth> 1.	https://review.openstack.org/#/c/379585/
15:03:23 <rhochmuth> so, we have a little bit of an agenda today
15:03:32 <rhochmuth> i guess we shoudl cover that first and then open it up
15:03:53 <rhochmuth> #topic monasca-statsd (stable) and monasca-agent out of sync
15:04:00 <witek> that me
15:04:35 <witek> we see cited warnings when monitoring log-api
15:05:51 <witek> the commit in statsd is not in stable, and as far as I understand it can be difficult to merge it into stable
15:05:54 <ddieterly> o/
15:06:20 <rhochmuth> i think we'll be allowed to do the merge in a couple of days
15:06:47 <rhochmuth> so, we can cherry pick into the newton branch the relevant commit
15:06:54 <Trpger> !get mirc
15:06:55 <rhochmuth> and then update the tafs on the newton branch
15:06:55 <openstack> Trpger: Error: "get" is not a valid command.
15:07:24 <rhochmuth> will that resolve the problem?
15:07:31 <witek> if that will be possible, then it shouldn't be a problem
15:08:04 <witek> yes, that should resolve the problem
15:08:24 <rhochmuth> witek: can you do the cherry pick to the newton branch?
15:08:57 <witek> yes, should I wait until freeze is lifted?
15:09:14 <rhochmuth> i think so
15:09:23 <witek> ok
15:09:42 <rhochmuth> note, this review for updating tags is also in progres, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/374361/
15:09:48 <rhochmuth> for monasca-statsd
15:10:34 <rhochmuth> i think they will merge that review relatively soon
15:10:57 <rhochmuth> after that merge goes through then we can cherry-pick to monasca-statsd and update the tags
15:11:27 <rhochmuth> :-)
15:12:01 <rhochmuth> does that cover that topic?
15:12:06 <witek> yes, thanks
15:12:14 <witek> I just hope it works :)
15:12:35 <rhochmuth> me too
15:13:28 <rhochmuth> #topic Status of openstack-ansible-os_monasca  role and merging fixes
15:13:41 <rhochmuth> is someone here avaialble to discuss this topic?
15:13:44 <haad1> yeah
15:13:51 <rhochmuth> hi haad1
15:13:52 <haad1> so for me there are couple questions here
15:13:54 <haad1> hi
15:14:03 <rhochmuth> are you working on this?
15:14:15 <rhochmuth> or just have questions
15:14:22 <rhochmuth> i'm not involved in this effort
15:14:27 <haad1> yeah I would like to as I have to deploy monasca with ansible anyway
15:15:11 <rhochmuth> hhad1: you have the floor
15:15:36 <rhochmuth> haad1: sorry, got your name wrong
15:15:45 <haad1> so what do we want to do with this role
15:15:58 <haad1> install + configure whole monasca + backend
15:16:38 <rhochmuth> that would be nice
15:16:48 <haad1> my suggestion would be to split it into multiple roles
15:16:55 <haad1> as that would be much more usable
15:16:59 <rhochmuth> are you working on a single node depoly or multiple nodes
15:17:10 <rhochmuth> clustered or non-clustered
15:17:17 <haad1> we are doploying it on multiple nodes
15:17:36 <haad1> api/notification/thresh on couple + backend on other
15:17:37 <rhochmuth> ok, so what we've done in the past is create a role for every component
15:18:08 <rhochmuth> mysql, influxdb, zk, kafka, storm
15:18:17 <rhochmuth> those are the based shared services
15:18:30 <rhochmuth> you already have roles for mysql i'm sure
15:18:34 <rhochmuth> but probably not the others
15:18:47 <rhochmuth> then i would create roles for monasca-api, monasca-persister, ...
15:18:54 <haad1> so what I did in my pull request is that I have added support for deploying backend services with this role
15:19:04 <haad1> and would add api services in other one
15:19:57 <rhochmuth> i'm not an ansible expert
15:20:03 <haad1> ok and how I would make them available to community as monasca roles for deployment ?
15:20:23 <haad1> My plan wat to change existing openstack roles to help others
15:21:04 <rhochmuth> i tend to think of each compnent as a micro-service that can be deployed independently
15:21:11 <rhochmuth> each component with it's own role
15:21:23 <haad1> yeah that's why I think current approach is not optimal at all
15:21:25 <haad1> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/openstack-ansible-os_monasca/
15:21:36 <haad1> using one mega role is not good
15:21:41 <haad1> it should be per service
15:22:01 <rhochmuth> well, i don't think it is a terrible idea to have a single role
15:22:03 <rhochmuth> either
15:22:11 <rhochmuth> it depends on a lot of things
15:22:21 <rhochmuth> we have written a lot of ansible roles a while ago, https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=ansible-monasca
15:22:30 <rhochmuth> and had created a role for each component
15:22:42 <rhochmuth> the down side is lot's of repos, roles, …
15:23:13 <rhochmuth> but, i still think a separate role for each repo/component is the optimal approach
15:23:22 <haad1> you can still have one wrapper role which will wrap all api services
15:23:26 <rhochmuth> or better approach
15:23:37 <haad1> to one role and then do the same for backend
15:23:43 <rhochmuth> yes, that might be a good approach
15:24:28 <haad1> ok so I can create those roles for newton branch as I have to update our deployment to newton anyway
15:24:45 <haad1> but how can I get them under opentstack
15:25:32 <rhochmuth> i'm not sure i understand the question
15:26:35 <haad1> how we can make them offical monasca roles under openstack
15:28:00 <rhochmuth> unfortunately, i don't have much engagemnt with the openstack ansible project
15:28:22 <rhochmuth> have you submitted blueprints and reivewed/discussed with that project?
15:29:00 <haad1> that would be my mistake I thought that this role is under monasca project
15:29:12 <haad1> I will ping them tomorrow on their meeting
15:29:17 <haad1> and see what happens
15:29:22 <rhochmuth> ok, so I was thinking that you were involved with that project already
15:29:33 <haad1> ok thanks
15:29:40 <rhochmuth> that explains the problem
15:29:52 <rhochmuth> so the openstack ansible project is run by another team
15:30:07 <rhochmuth> i'm hoping that they will want a monasca role
15:30:12 <rhochmuth> i can't see why they wouldn't
15:30:30 <rhochmuth> so, i think for guidance and process questions it will be best to follow-up with them
15:30:35 <rhochmuth> i will be glad to help
15:30:55 <rhochmuth> although, when it comes to ansible/deployment i'm not the right guy to ask
15:31:06 <rhochmuth> but there are others invovled with monasca that do know a lot in this area
15:31:20 <rhochmuth> so, they could help with reviews on the roles that you are creating
15:31:50 <rhochmuth> so, should we move on?
15:31:53 <rhochmuth> to the next topic?
15:32:37 <pratid> please proceed
15:32:40 <rhochmuth> also, if the ansible openstack project needs or wants our involvmenet, then we can help
15:32:45 <rhochmuth> thx pratid
15:33:08 <rhochmuth> #topic reviews
15:33:11 <rhochmuth> #topic Reviews
15:33:20 <rhochmuth> #topic https://review.openstack.org/#/c/379585/
15:33:57 <rhochmuth> i'm waiting for gates to pass, then i'll check with craig, but it looks like this one is ready
15:34:55 <rhochmuth> rbak: u there?
15:34:57 <rbak> Thanks.  I was just trying to get eyes on that.
15:35:02 <rbak> I don't have anything to add
15:35:23 <rhochmuth> unless craig has any issues, looks like a merge
15:35:31 <rhochmuth> awaiting any additional comments
15:35:43 <rhochmuth> also, as gates were down for a few days, didn't look at this
15:36:37 <rhochmuth> #topic open floor
15:36:49 <rhochmuth> i think that completes the formal agenda
15:37:06 <rhochmuth> if anyone has any additional topics that they would like to discuss, then the floor is open
15:37:10 <rhochmuth> we have about 20 minutes
15:37:21 <pratid> i'd like to include
15:37:27 <pratid> this review for next meeting
15:37:28 <pratid> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/374204/
15:37:42 <pratid> about but https://bugs.launchpad.net/monasca/+bug/1625573
15:37:43 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1625573 in Monasca "monasca-setup does not support service_type & endpoint_type for Keystone Catalog" [Undecided,Fix committed] - Assigned to Pablo Rodriguez (pratid)
15:38:23 <rhochmuth> pratid: sounds good, please add to the agenda
15:38:29 <pratid> could I
15:38:31 <pratid> could I?
15:38:32 <rhochmuth> also, i'll try and review over the next few days
15:38:50 <rhochmuth> pratid: the agenda is posted at, https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/monasca-team-meeting-agenda, and is open for anyone to add too
15:38:54 <pratid> good, i'll do
15:39:08 <pratid> didn't know about the procedure, sorry
15:39:12 <rhochmuth> np
15:39:32 <rhochmuth> i've just added a spot for next week
15:39:45 <pratid> thx
15:40:00 <rhochmuth> I just added your review
15:40:13 <rhochmuth> so you shoudl be all set for next week
15:40:58 <rhochmuth> also, if we get enough review comments this might be addressed by next week
15:41:13 <pratid> perfect
15:41:30 <rhochmuth> it looks like joe keen had some comments on that review
15:41:53 <pratid> yes, and i added some comments in reply
15:42:03 <pratid> i'd like to revisit this issue
15:42:12 <rhochmuth> ok, i'll take a look
15:42:24 <rhochmuth> and ping joe
15:43:20 <pratid> nothing else from my side
15:43:27 <rhochmuth> pratid: thx
15:43:52 <rhochmuth> are there other topics to discuss
15:44:13 <rhochmuth> i should mention i'm trying to put the monasca agenda together for the summit
15:44:25 <rhochmuth> but it mainly some of the areas that we've discussed/mentioned already
15:45:04 <rhochmuth> i should mention that there is a backlog of reviews
15:45:22 <rhochmuth> rbak: if we merged the changes for the names, dimensions names and dimension values
15:45:31 <rhochmuth> do you think you could complete the grafana changes
15:45:49 <rhochmuth> or, the other way to look at this, can you complete all the grafana work first
15:45:55 <rhochmuth> then give us a thumbs up
15:46:10 <rhochmuth> then we can merge the api changes and your grafana changes more or less at the same time
15:46:18 <rhochmuth> i'm just worried about downtime
15:46:20 <rbak> I can do the grafana changes any time
15:46:26 <rbak> They shouldn't be difficult
15:46:27 <rhochmuth> cool
15:46:30 <rhochmuth> i think it is ready
15:46:51 <rhochmuth> we've been holding off with final reviewes and merges due to newton release
15:47:14 <rhochmuth> ill check with kaiyan and others, but i think it is good to go
15:47:46 <rhochmuth> so, if you complete grafana work, then we can merge, and hopefully very little downtime
15:48:21 <rhochmuth> i think we can start merging to master after oct 6th
15:48:43 <rhochmuth> assuming the origianl schedule holds
15:49:11 <witek> 7th
15:49:19 <rhochmuth> thx witek
15:49:44 <rhochmuth> also, i tried out xenial again this morning
15:49:56 <rhochmuth> it is going further than the last time i tried
15:50:19 <rhochmuth> so the big issue i beleive has been resolved in merged in the virtual box image
15:50:26 <rhochmuth> but, it didn't complete
15:50:40 <rhochmuth> i think i ran into problems with openjdk7
15:50:52 <rhochmuth> but, i didnt' get a thorough look
15:50:56 <rhochmuth> had to run
15:51:29 <rhochmuth> once xenial support merged, that will open up several other reviews to merge
15:53:22 <rhochmuth> .
15:53:31 <shinya_kwbt> big issue i beleive has been resolved in merged in the virtual box image that is good
15:53:32 <rhochmuth> other topics/updates/requests
15:53:49 <rhochmuth> thx shinya_kwbt
15:53:54 <rhochmuth> yes, it went further
15:54:08 <rhochmuth> but still some problems, that i wasn't sure about
15:54:15 <shinya_kwbt> I also want to try but I cant do that now sorry. I'm in business trip.
15:54:31 <rhochmuth> are you in barcelona already?
15:55:04 <shinya_kwbt> Oh no. I'm not rich haha
15:55:12 <shinya_kwbt> I'm in tokyo now.
15:55:40 <rhochmuth> hopefully, i'll get another look later today at xenial
15:55:40 <witek> I think Tokyo is more expensive :)
15:55:50 <rhochmuth> maybe i'll even be able to figure it out
15:56:38 <rhochmuth> ok, sounds like we are wrapping-up for today
15:56:42 <shinya_kwbt> witek: Yes. hotel is very small and expensive!
15:56:43 <rhochmuth> i'm going to end the meeting
15:56:52 <pratid> bye
15:56:56 <rhochmuth> bye
15:57:04 <witek> thanks, bye
15:57:06 <Kamil__> bye
15:57:06 <shinya_kwbt> thx bye
15:57:07 <koji> thanks
15:57:39 <rhochmuth> #endmeeting