21:02:13 #startmeeting nova 21:02:14 Meeting started Thu Oct 10 21:02:13 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is russellb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:02:16 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:02:18 The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 21:02:18 hello, everyone! 21:02:27 hi 21:02:29 hi 21:02:30 hi 21:02:42 #topic havana 21:02:43 o/ 21:02:49 havana release is one week from today 21:03:00 we decided to go ahead and do an RC2 for nova 21:03:02 #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/havana-rc2 21:03:24 i pulled in some stuff that has been fixed and was on havana-rc-potential 21:03:35 was there any one bug that necessitated that 21:03:37 if there is anything else that you feel should go in, please let me know 21:03:41 jog0: nope 21:03:45 Morning 21:03:45 russellb: nice 21:03:57 i think the release has been pretty solid 21:04:02 russleb: via email, or PM, or let you know here? 21:04:04 and these were a set of things that were nice to get in 21:04:10 tjones: any 21:04:27 but we *really* need to get anything that's a nice to have in by sometime tomorrow 21:04:28 russellb: the boto unit test patch come back over? 21:04:38 anything after that is only absolutely critical stuff 21:04:49 sdague: yeah, dansmith had a cherry pick 21:04:52 cool 21:04:57 russelb: got it 21:05:17 dansmith: is that obj not detecting sys meta changes be something targetted to rc2? 21:05:41 it's not targeted, no 21:05:43 is there a bug for it? 21:05:45 i didn't see what conditions would catch it 21:05:46 yeah 21:05:48 should be 21:06:09 https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1237102\ 21:06:11 Launchpad bug 1237102 in nova "Conductor does not properly copy objects during change tracking" [Medium,Fix committed] 21:06:13 without the \ 21:06:36 Maybe it's not currently causing a problem 21:06:56 comstud: dansmith ok well you guys take a look and let me know if you think its impact justifies going into rc2 21:07:00 yeah 21:07:24 the other havana todo in the next week is finalizing our release notes 21:07:26 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReleaseNotes/Havana#OpenStack_Compute_.28Nova.29 21:07:38 I think it's really close to complete at this point 21:07:44 we're missing xenapi features and hyper-v features 21:07:48 and that's it 21:07:53 and anything you guys find when you review it :-) 21:07:57 so take a look 21:08:16 not just the feature list, but also anything appropriate for upgrade notes 21:08:57 i imagine a *lot* of people will see/read this list, so it's worth making sure it's good/complete/correct/etc 21:09:23 that's all i've got on havana stuff 21:09:27 any comments/questions? 21:10:16 #topic icehouse design summit 21:10:25 #link http://summit.openstack.org/ 21:10:29 we already have more proposals than time slots :) 21:10:39 #info deadline for proposals, oct 17 21:10:58 please get your stuff in by next week, because we'll need time to sort through them and figure out the schedule 21:11:03 i talked about making the schedule last week 21:11:19 i decided i want to do it with just a small group, to make sure we can get it done quickly, since there really isn't much time 21:11:44 but everyone is certainly encouraged to comment on proposals with any thoughts you have, and that will influence the end result 21:12:37 russellb: I remember you will prefer no sharing this time , right? 21:12:57 yjiang5_: ideally, yes. in the case of duplicates, we might merge 21:13:06 but otherwise, i'd rather avoid merging, yes 21:13:13 which means more might get rejected 21:13:18 russellb: got it. 21:13:28 but i suspect there will be cases where a mailing list discussion is probably OK 21:13:39 we won't merge unless we merge 21:13:40 something not that controversial, or not as complex, or whatever 21:13:47 comstud: that's accurate 21:13:51 100% 21:13:51 Heh 21:14:00 DB might make sense for a merge, just to be contrary 21:14:08 mikal: with what? 21:14:11 There are two separate groups working on different DB things, but not enough for two serssions 21:14:49 i saw yours, is there another session though? 21:15:05 I don't think so. I was goign to trick Boris into using some of mine. 21:15:05 ' 21:15:06 there is this DB one, but it should probably be by itself: http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/181 21:15:16 But I interpret this conversation as saying you'd prefer that didn't happen? 21:15:21 mikal: oh OK, well that would work. if so, please just update your description 21:15:36 ok 21:15:49 no it's more for things where it's really different topics ... or kind of related 21:16:07 anyway, hard to speak about this in general terms 21:16:08 Ahhh, ok 21:16:21 i think the thing that triggered this was scheduler folks 21:16:23 http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/16 is the one I was thinking of 21:16:29 i ended up jamming them together in a few sessions last time and they didn't like it :) 21:16:48 it didn't really work great either for some of it 21:17:20 oof, sorry, a call went long 21:17:33 dansmith: unacceptable 21:17:45 russellb: you know who to blame :) 21:17:49 heh 21:17:56 that's all i have on the design summit for now 21:18:02 unless anyone would like to talk about specific sessions 21:18:36 johnthetubaguy: you have 2 that might be duplicates ... "Prestart servers for faster boot times" and "Improve VM boot times, by pre-starting VMs" 21:18:43 maybe forgot that you already proposed it? :) 21:18:50 russellb: oops, sorry 21:18:54 np 21:19:12 that explains why the blueprint was already created 21:19:54 #topic sub-team repots 21:19:58 #undo 21:19:59 Removing item from minutes: 21:20:00 #topic sub-team reports 21:20:08 any updates from sub-teams? 21:20:25 no xenapi meeting this week, but the summit session etherpad is getting worked on offline 21:20:45 mrodden: here? 21:20:53 johnthetubaguy: sounds good, i saw our sessions start to roll in 21:21:29 i guess we could talk about powervm CI 21:21:36 cool, how's that coming 21:21:43 mrodden: ? 21:21:55 k, will see if he pops in :) 21:22:07 tjones: i saw a message on the -infra list about vmware CI, sounds like that's close? 21:22:07 hi 21:22:11 mrodden: hi! 21:22:30 i know last time there was discussion on what exactly the requirements were for CI 21:22:33 yep - the name we wanted to use (SmokeSignal) was denied. 21:22:42 tjones: heh 21:22:48 tjones: how about ... vmware CI 21:22:52 that's the last blocker ;-) so we are proposing vSmoker 21:23:03 mrodden: ok, so are you guys waiting on a clearer definition on that from me then? 21:23:07 was there a ML post or wiki page that came out of that? 21:23:08 mrodden: we decided a couple weeks ago that it is "running tempest" I think 21:23:20 mrodden: no post, just chatter in the meeting 21:23:22 dansmith: but how scoped is running tempest 21:23:24 yes.. but there are sets of tempest tests 21:23:26 running tempest though, effectively, is the goal 21:23:34 mriedem: not disabling things that don't work :D 21:23:55 dansmith: well for example there are tests against APIs that aren't implemented, e.g. nova diagnostics 21:23:58 johnthetubaguy: which btw, we need to look at for the xenapi driver in smokestack (running tempest) 21:24:00 mriedem: unless it's a fundamental thing the platform doesn't support, but then upstream tempest should be aware 21:24:25 johnthetubaguy: i think we really want to see the CI for all drivers running tempest 21:24:26 mriedem: yep, so I think that's fair game to exclude 21:24:42 dansmith: mriedem agreed 21:24:43 i can tell you that right now we're running 1152 tempest tests against powervm with db2 21:24:47 mriedem: maybe publish the tempest config you're using? 21:24:48 so it's not peanuts 21:24:48 russellb: yep, well looking for more normal based tempest running, outside of smokestack too 21:24:55 johnthetubaguy: great 21:25:03 mriedem: for discussion/agreement 21:25:12 russellb: vmware CI…. catchy ;-) sure we can use that. will have +1 by next meeting, −1 maybe too. I don't know the exact # we are running but it is > 1000 21:25:25 russellb: totally agree that tempest is the right goal, not quite there yet, but there is hope yet 21:25:26 tjones: vSmoker is cool, too 21:25:30 tjones: 1000 nodes? 21:25:36 or 1000 tests? 21:25:42 johnthetubaguy: *nods* 21:25:53 russellb: > 100 tests. not sure how many nodes. can find out the config 21:26:00 s/100/1000/ 21:26:06 tjones: doesn't matter, was just clarifying 21:26:10 heh 21:26:11 tjones: as long as you keep up :-) 21:26:20 with the patch flow that is 21:26:24 russellb: dansmith: i think we have a few open questions for powervm that we're still working through like which OS are we going to run on, how are we going to deploy openstack (rdo?), tempest tests, etc 21:26:40 i really need to figure out what smokestack does 21:26:53 mriedem: okay 21:27:03 why not devstack + tempest as a starting point? 21:27:06 mriedem: I think that smokestack builds packages and then installs them 21:27:26 yeah, using puppet 21:27:27 johnthetubaguy: question to me? 21:27:33 dansmith: it builds packages on the fly? 21:27:35 mriedem: johnthetubaguy yeah devstack would be good if it's doable 21:27:38 neelashah: yeah 21:27:49 mriedem: yeah, its probably easier 21:27:49 mriedem: *ideally* the answer to all those questions should be as close to what a user would do as possible. 21:27:53 is the smokestack source available? 21:27:56 is that available someplace to take a look or proprietary? 21:28:00 dansmith: johnthetubaguy: agreed on devstack 21:28:03 mrodden: yeah it's all open 21:28:34 smokestack.org is not what i wanted ... 21:28:41 internally we're building packages too and running against rhel 6, naturally i felt like i had to duplicate that for CI but i don't think so 21:28:47 mrodden: https://smokestack.openstack.org/about 21:28:56 russellb: cool 21:29:37 i'd like to work db2 into this as a backend so we can kill 2 birds with one stone there, but that's probably more of a stretch at this point, although db2 is a plan for icehouse 21:29:40 mriedem: well, being close to how users use your platform is a good plan for sure 21:30:08 mriedem: i.e. building packages in the same way you build your real ones 21:30:15 dansmith: yeah, so i'm actually thinking fedora 19 + smokestack + db2 21:30:27 +1 21:30:32 but mysql would work too at first 21:30:47 I'd rather you use db2 21:30:50 so I can laugh at you 21:30:50 me too 21:30:52 but either way 21:30:53 lol 21:30:54 mriedem: wouldn't hurt to have both. That way you could tell your db2 problems from general problems. 21:31:05 dripton: totally agree 21:31:09 dripton: surely, but just more resources that way 21:31:21 anyway, this is my thought process right now, we still have to tackle the scale issue 21:31:23 dripton: I think these guys are using surplus Powermac G5s, so... 21:31:31 eep 21:31:37 (just kidding) 21:31:45 so by the time smokestack finishes the patch is already approved 21:31:58 that's a good point 21:32:17 russellb: we probably need in the guidelines a "a vote 48 hours later is not good enough" 21:32:21 dansmith: actually, are there guidelines o nthat? 21:32:33 how long before the tests have to report back in? 21:32:34 neelashah: we need some for sure 21:32:43 thats something that i would like to see 21:32:50 +1 21:32:52 we need to kind of figure out what we need to be shooting for 21:32:58 smokestack is going to take longer if it starts doing tempest instead of torpedo, so there is some work there too I think 21:32:59 neelashah: have you guys done any back of the envelope calculations to figure out how fast you'll be able to report? 21:33:29 neelashah: assuming you have an idea on number of nodes you'll have, which maybe you don't... 21:33:36 dansmith: we haven't yet - starting to put the hw/infrastructure plans so this will be good info to have to plan for 21:33:40 neelashah: okay 21:33:54 russellb: anyway, we can probably work this in the background if you want to continue 21:34:01 agreed 21:34:08 OK, well, good progress i think 21:34:13 and it's clear we need some details written up on the wiki 21:34:16 yeah 21:34:17 what tests need to run 21:34:23 and some speed requirements 21:34:35 so i've got that on my todo 21:34:46 #topic open discussion 21:34:56 beagles: you around? 21:35:03 last week you brought up your neutron vs nova-network doc 21:35:07 any updates on it? 21:35:14 #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E9CiG8fmcn0FMI15zpE0dRQ1CcFhXV8TxL7mU7vgWv8/edit 21:35:33 i failed and didn't get you feedback this week ... sorry 21:35:47 hi guys 21:35:48 sorry 21:35:54 was interrupted 21:35:58 np! 21:36:09 I'm still working on the tempest/testing section 21:36:23 along with a survey of current outstanding issues that are arguably related 21:36:50 beagles: btw we have basic perforamnce testing and am working on getting it up on neutron 21:37:03 jog0: nice! 21:37:06 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/50449/ 21:37:53 speaking of new gate jobs ... we need to get that cells job going 21:37:59 comstud: alaski ^ 21:38:09 there was some chatter about getting me to Hong Kong to have a session amongst the Neutron crowd. 21:38:17 beagles: that would rock 21:38:18 I suspect that is not going to happen though 21:38:27 but you never know 21:38:29 beagles: i was about to ask, since you're going somewhere else far soon right? 21:38:48 russellb, yes, Tel Aviv on Saturday for a week 21:38:54 safe travels :) 21:39:05 well regarding the summit, i will at least try to do my part to catch up with neutron folks 21:39:07 russellb: I know there are plans around fixing the cells job, I may help out too, depending on how stuff goes 21:39:15 johnthetubaguy: excellent 21:39:26 russellb, thks! 21:39:29 johnthetubaguy: i just want to get the bare minimum running and gating, and then we can expand from there 21:39:30 russellb: cells issue is also getting all the features working, so it can be full tempest! 21:39:32 russellb: yeah. I can get a PR for that together 21:39:44 johnthetubaguy: just devstack exercises would be OK to start with, i think that's how it's configured now 21:39:51 russellb: agreed, simple tests would be good first 21:39:54 alaski: not sure what a PR is, but OK! :-) 21:40:15 russellb: sorry, pull request, non gerrit terminology :| 21:40:16 pull request? 21:40:19 ha 21:40:21 heh 21:40:23 sorry. 21:40:48 i need to check experimental to see if the cells gate still passes 21:40:49 heh 21:40:56 but it does only run devstack exercises and should pass 21:41:09 * johnthetubaguy was wondering why we needed a press release 21:41:30 if it's working, now that we're past the big freeze rush, should move it back to running on everything for a little bit, and then can switch to gating 21:41:31 johnthetubaguy: hm? 21:41:38 oh 21:41:41 gah i'm slow. 21:41:43 haha 21:42:20 alright, any other topics? 21:42:24 In other news, as of a few minutes in the future(https://review.openstack.org/#/c/49853/) novaclient will be python33 compat 21:42:28 nice work on havana everyone, coming together nicely 21:42:30 woot! 21:42:43 jog0: nice! 21:42:47 and gating will happen shortly after https://review.openstack.org/#/c/51058/1 21:43:01 jog0: i need to do a novaclient release soon anyway, for the final havana bits 21:43:06 also got the keystone token caching working again in novaclient 21:44:25 so less round trips to keystone needed 21:44:32 good stuff 21:44:41 jog0: now you're just bragging 21:45:06 dansmith: I stayed up late last night doing it ... so you cought me 21:45:10 heh 21:45:18 well your work is very much appreciated :-) 21:45:55 i noticed our review turnaround averages are looking really good right now ... http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/nova-openreviews.html 21:45:57 so yay 21:46:14 not to say that some things haven't waited a long time ... but overall, better than we were doing toward the end of the cycle 21:46:24 perhaps not surprising, but yay anyway 21:46:47 ok, thanks everyone for your time! 21:47:02 #endmeeting