14:00:43 <rhochmuth> #startmeeting monasca
14:00:44 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jul 19 14:00:43 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is rhochmuth. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:45 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:47 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'monasca'
14:00:50 <rhochmuth> o/
14:01:03 <koji> o/
14:01:20 <shinya_kwbt> o/
14:01:41 <kornica> o/
14:01:43 <rhochmuth> hi everyone
14:01:50 <Fdaisuke> o/
14:02:15 <kornica> hello
14:02:26 <sc> yo
14:02:26 <rhochmuth> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/monasca-team-meeting-agenda
14:02:36 <rhochmuth> Agenda for Wednesday July 19 2017 (14:00 UTC)
14:02:36 <rhochmuth> 1.	Reviews
14:02:37 <rhochmuth> 1.	https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479169/  - Needs +1 to move forward and to start reenabling  the gates (Added by Artur Basiak, unfortunatelly I cannot join meeting)
14:02:37 <rhochmuth> 2.	monasca-docker
14:02:37 <rhochmuth> 1.	https://github.com/monasca/monasca-docker/pull/121
14:02:37 <rhochmuth> 2.	https://github.com/monasca/monasca-docker/pull/120
14:02:37 <rhochmuth> 3.	https://github.com/monasca/monasca-docker/issues/122
14:02:48 <rhochmuth> not a huge agenda for the day
14:02:54 <rhochmuth> but, we can work through it
14:03:16 <rhochmuth> #topic https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479169/
14:03:39 <kornica> I can take it, Artur has some apartment stuff or sth going on these days
14:04:30 <kornica> in overall, Witek wanted you to take a look and approve the cleanup, that said - the change is more or less dropping old codebase and adding all of the tooling
14:04:37 <kornica> we've developed recently for other components
14:05:24 <rhochmuth> ok, i'll look through and add a +1
14:05:39 <rhochmuth> although, my time lately has been difficult
14:05:45 <kornica> if you want there are already 3 related changes
14:06:00 <kornica> from which the most notable is an idea of extending monasca-persister to handle events
14:06:08 <kornica> persisting raw events into database
14:06:22 <kornica> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485113/
14:06:40 <kornica> I know that having a time is difficult these days (oh...yeah...I know that)
14:06:54 <kornica> still we know this is vital to have such details communicated
14:07:11 <rhochmuth> yup
14:07:23 <kornica> other side of the coing is the idea of adding new project
14:07:23 <rhochmuth> so, you are planning on extending the persister, rather than add a new one
14:07:37 <kornica> we had such a plan initially
14:07:58 <kornica> but witek stepped in (no offense or sth) in a pretty much correct momement to point out
14:08:09 <kornica> that basically we might not need new repo / service
14:08:14 <kornica> but we can extend persister
14:08:27 <kornica> and roll with the idea I presented in comments for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485113/
14:08:27 <rhochmuth> i see, so witek is in charge now
14:08:34 <rhochmuth> :-)
14:08:41 <kornica> he's not in charge
14:08:41 <kornica> :D
14:08:57 <kornica> though we've been talking a lot how to approach the events topic
14:09:00 <kornica> the best way we could
14:09:05 <rhochmuth> i'm just kidding
14:09:11 <kornica> i know ;-)
14:09:20 <kornica> just giving some background :D
14:09:33 <kornica> anyway, if could you find some time to tell which idea might be better
14:09:38 <kornica> that'd be really great ;-0
14:09:40 <kornica> :)
14:09:45 <rhochmuth> sure
14:09:52 <rhochmuth> i probably would have said keep them separate
14:10:04 <rhochmuth> however, everytime we add a new repo it is a lot of overhead
14:10:16 <rhochmuth> so, not exactly for adding more overhead
14:10:38 <rhochmuth> so, i'm probably ok with that in the persister
14:10:41 <kornica> that's pretty much the argument that Witek has given
14:10:56 <kornica> question is should be do the same for every other part of events :/
14:11:00 <kornica> and that is somehow unclear
14:11:09 <rhochmuth> you can get caried away with microservices
14:11:19 <kornica> there are benefits of such approach
14:11:22 <kornica> and there re downsides
14:11:26 <rhochmuth> yup
14:11:29 <kornica> yeah, that'd be the downside
14:11:41 <kornica> I will ask then
14:11:45 <rhochmuth> i see, so are think thinking about adding to the monasca-api directly then too
14:11:56 <kornica> well yeah
14:11:57 <rhochmuth> would that be still under consideration?
14:12:11 <kornica> if you see this as better idea, yeah - we would reconsider
14:12:24 <kornica> at the moment events-api is on hold
14:12:34 <kornica> no gates, no CI - pretty much dead repo
14:12:55 <rhochmuth> yup, lot's of fun enabliing all that infrastructure too
14:13:01 <kornica> we can either go direction we are now going
14:13:11 <kornica> or retire the project
14:13:28 <rhochmuth> let's ask witek
14:13:38 <kornica> he will most likely read all that
14:13:45 <kornica> and we decided to talk about all that
14:14:18 <kornica> so most likely we will continue with current approach and if necessary just port all that to exisiting repos
14:14:23 <rhochmuth> i'm going to have to think a bit off-line and look closer at what you've done so far
14:14:31 <rhochmuth> and talk to a few folks
14:14:39 <kornica> nevertheless I am sure we will try and communicate
14:14:43 <rhochmuth> sure
14:14:57 <kornica> though I am not really into events now (my priorities goes to other items on agenda) :D
14:15:09 <kornica> but I will ask arturb to put some focus on that fact
14:15:15 <rhochmuth> ok
14:15:25 <kornica> and thx for having a look
14:15:27 <rhochmuth> i'll send an email
14:15:59 <rhochmuth> so, probably time to move to the next topic
14:16:15 <rhochmuth> #topic monasca-docker
14:16:16 <rhochmuth> 2.	monasca-docker
14:16:16 <rhochmuth> 1.	https://github.com/monasca/monasca-docker/pull/121
14:16:16 <rhochmuth> 2.	https://github.com/monasca/monasca-docker/pull/120
14:16:16 <rhochmuth> 3.	https://github.com/monasca/monasca-docker/issues/122
14:16:48 <kornica> well, we started working on log-pipeline in docker (finally decided on container course in fujitsu ;P)
14:16:53 <hoppalm> woohooo!!!
14:16:54 <rhochmuth> this looks really exciting
14:17:08 <kornica> and in overall figured that we want to get on board with y'all :D
14:17:26 <rhochmuth> i see timothyb89 has been working on it
14:17:30 <kornica> for now we've just have mainly #121 (log-pipeline extension)
14:17:34 <kornica> couple of ideas
14:17:38 <rhochmuth> witek gave me a heads-up last week
14:18:01 <kornica> so I am sure he might have mentioned that we want to contribute to monasca-helm as well ?
14:18:45 <rhochmuth> sounds good
14:18:57 <kornica> yeah, it's just helm is much tougher nut to crack :D
14:19:26 <hoppalm> if you need any help or want us to walk you through it we would be happy to
14:19:29 <kornica> well, at leat today, was first time I sat and tried to write sth...ended up trying something already there
14:19:54 <kornica> we've got a gist list of activites/features/changes we would like to apply to monasca-docker
14:20:01 <kornica> but we're still consolidating that internally
14:20:33 <kornica> those would be the things we consider important to have but shouldn't conflict too much with your idea
14:20:36 <kornica> *idea
14:20:49 <kornica> hoppalm: thx - for start a reviews of images I've written would be great
14:20:59 <hoppalm> yes we can do that
14:21:15 <hoppalm> we will look at the two docker prs
14:21:27 <kornica> there is one breaking point there, but I've put that point into comments under #121
14:21:35 <sc> I did some test with odcker
14:21:47 <hoppalm> yes travis always lacks behind on docker version
14:21:52 <sc> I changed the order of box creation
14:21:53 <hoppalm> we can try to manually upgrade it
14:22:40 <hoppalm> we have been thinking about switching to multistage build
14:22:44 <hoppalm> for some of our stuff
14:22:46 <kornica> hoppalm: actually I was referring to the kafka topics creation (my idea was to make log-pipeline an extension without affecting docker-compose.yml which in overall is metric pipeline)
14:23:03 <kornica> hoppalm: I already have this for kibana (but as you saw it requires newer docker)
14:23:33 <hoppalm> ohhh okay yes I will go through it with Tim and we will review it
14:23:52 <kornica> hoppalm: big thumb up and high five :D
14:24:00 <kornica> sc: what about box order ?
14:24:32 <sc> kornica: I changed the order in docker-compose
14:25:01 <kornica> you have any code ? at least me - well I am not sure I understand what that means :D
14:25:19 <sc> I just put mysql up, it looks to me it speads up setup
14:25:43 <sc> kornica: OK, I'll share ASAP
14:26:33 <kornica> ah ok :)
14:26:45 <hoppalm> probably did as multiple things need to talk to it so the sooner it comes up the better, and please put up any changes you think are good
14:26:48 <hoppalm> and we will look
14:26:56 <kornica> sure
14:27:13 <kornica> ok, I think I've exhausted the topic - nice to see that you're happy with that contribution
14:28:22 <kornica> I have one openstack-reviews item in my agenda, that I did not post but figured now it is worth discussing
14:29:20 <kornica> unless someone has anything to add about sth else, I could just elaborate on that
14:29:30 <rhochmuth> you have the floor
14:30:52 <kornica> the changes I wanted to mentioned are about inhibit,silencing and grouping
14:31:00 <rhochmuth> oh
14:31:05 <kornica> I had to -2 one of them as it would break the CI
14:31:22 <kornica> but apperently there is now nobody who would adress that :/
14:31:51 <kornica> I mean, is that really that bad of situation from HPE side that such promissing features are left behind ;-(
14:31:53 <kornica> ?
14:32:07 <rhochmuth> we haven't left it behind
14:32:26 <kornica> similar comments goes to monasca-agent mods that, for example https://review.openstack.org/#/c/448895/
14:32:52 <kornica> oh...I mean, as reviewer, I am not quite sure what else apart from pinging owner we could do
14:33:14 <kornica> -2 is pretty strong, but breaking CI was never sth that we were accepting
14:34:14 <hoppalm> we are planning on finishing it as it is a feature important to us we want
14:34:24 <kornica> it's just the time ?
14:34:29 <rhochmuth> andrea has been out?
14:34:45 <rhochmuth> so, we are trying to figure out how to address/load-balance this on the team
14:34:51 <kornica> well, 've given this -2 over 2 weeks from now
14:35:56 <kornica> I mean, please don't get me wrong or anything like that - just trying to finally understand what should we expect in upstream
14:37:15 <rhochmuth> not sure how to address right now as the developer is not around
14:37:28 <rhochmuth> so, we've been trying to address this
14:38:31 <kornica> maybe someone (you, I believe would be the best guy) or someone else, could just go through open changes
14:38:35 <kornica> abandon what is really not needed
14:38:46 <kornica> mark needed changes with -1@W
14:39:19 <rhochmuth> yeah, we had talked about that a few months ago
14:39:27 <rhochmuth> but, i wouldn't abandon these changes
14:39:54 <rhochmuth> for alarm inhibition, silencing, ...
14:40:39 <kornica> that's out of a question - those should be left for future work
14:40:59 <kornica> what about agent mods around container monitoring ?
14:41:53 <rhochmuth> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/448895/
14:41:58 <hoppalm> so i need to go through them again
14:42:13 <kornica> hoppalm: thx
14:42:19 <hoppalm> it was during the time when we were trying to learn what we want for kubernetes monitoring
14:42:47 <kornica> might be that now, that I finally have k8s and docker functional at my workstatation (finally off the proxy hook, yeah)
14:42:58 <kornica> I will be able to properly test those
14:43:22 <hoppalm> sweeet :) if you see gaps in our container monitoring let us know as well
14:43:29 <kornica> sure :D
14:43:45 <kornica> the only thing I would most certainly need would have them rebased by author :D
14:43:59 <kornica> later hopefully I will be smart enough to understand them and test them
14:43:59 <kornica> :D
14:44:19 <hoppalm> :)
14:44:23 <rhochmuth> btw, on another topic, has anyone from fujitsu thought about, https://www.netways.de/nocache/en/events/osmc/cfp/
14:44:41 <rhochmuth> deadline is uly 31st
14:44:42 <kornica> BTW: I've noticed that in helm repo you;ve been referring to minikube
14:44:46 <kornica> having that said - https://github.com/kornicameister/journeys/tree/master/kubernetes/scripts
14:44:54 <kornica> those might be come in handy for you ;-)
14:45:01 <kornica> that;s for kubeadm
14:45:31 <kornica> rhochmuth: I will ping rest of my team
14:45:51 <kornica> rhochmuth: thx
14:46:25 <rhochmuth> thx kornica
14:46:38 <rhochmuth> i need to run to another meeting right now
14:46:43 <rhochmuth> i know weird time
14:46:44 <hoppalm> oh sweet
14:46:56 <kornica> hoppalm: kubeadm scripts ?
14:46:56 <rhochmuth> can someone end the meeting when done
14:47:04 <hoppalm> oyeah
14:47:06 <kornica> I think someone should know how :D
14:48:03 <hoppalm> anything else from anyone?
14:48:04 <kornica> hoppalm: I am using those everyday since I wrote them (or rather reforged knowledge of my collegue associated with kubernetes-dashboard project :D)
14:48:16 <kornica> hoppalm: so they should be fine enough
14:48:36 <kornica> hoppalm: from my side - no
14:48:48 <hoppalm> cool anyone else or good to end meeting?
14:49:48 <hoppalm> ill take that as a no
14:49:54 <hoppalm> #endmeeting
14:49:55 <kornica> it's a trap
14:50:08 <hoppalm> dangit whats the exact command :)
14:50:28 <kornica> #endmeeting
14:50:34 <kornica> that should be it
14:50:42 <kornica> witek used that last time :D
14:50:47 <hoppalm> #end-meeting
14:50:49 <hoppalm> :)
14:50:52 <kornica> just copied and pasted here
14:50:57 <hoppalm> hoepfully it doesnt require roland to do it
14:50:58 <kornica> rotfl....
14:51:15 <hoppalm> let me send him a pm
14:51:23 <kornica> hmmm....ok...so how many developers you need to end the meeting
14:51:35 <rbrndt> n+1 developers
14:53:11 <kornica> #endmeeting
14:53:19 <kornica> ok, this has to be the correct command
14:53:24 <kornica> just checked other meeting logs
14:53:34 <kornica> I am out of juice to end meeting ;/
14:53:36 <rhochmuth> #endmeeting