21:04:49 #startmeeting nova 21:04:49 Meeting started Thu Apr 23 21:04:49 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mriedem. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:04:50 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:04:52 The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 21:04:56 someone should publish scripts for this :P 21:05:03 who's around? 21:05:04 no one? 21:05:05 sooooo \o 21:05:08 o/ 21:05:10 o/ 21:05:10 o/ 21:05:10 hi 21:05:12 o/ 21:05:13 o/ 21:05:22 o/ 21:05:23 o/ 21:05:27 ok, meeting agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova#Agenda_for_next_meeting 21:05:30 o/ 21:05:37 ping abhishekk mikal tjones cburgess jgrimm adrian_otto funzo mjturek jcookekhugen irina_pov krtaylor danpb alexpilotti flip214 jaypipes gilliard garyk edleafe dims moshele anteaya Nisha sileht claudiub lxsli neiljerram markus_z swamireddy alevine tonyb andreykurilin ndipanov sc68cal akuriata 21:05:39 release stuff - rc2 was out today 21:05:42 hi 21:05:55 i don't know of plans for an rc3 21:05:59 sdague: dansmith: ^? 21:06:31 this was the rc2 content anyway https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/kilo-rc2 21:06:32 hi 21:06:40 well well well 21:06:54 https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=kilo-rc-potential 21:06:56 this is the list of kilo-rc-potentials 21:06:56 https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=kilo-rc-potential 21:06:57 yeah 21:07:14 are there open stable/kilo reviews/ 21:07:15 ? 21:07:19 Hi as well, sorry, I thought this was the early week for some reason 21:07:39 https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/kilo,n,z 21:08:05 anyone have rc questions/issues? 21:08:31 moving on 21:08:33 sorry, I'm late 21:08:38 like everyone 21:08:39 so I'm curious if https://review.openstack.org/#/c/176396/ is worth getting into rc3 21:08:40 sheesh 21:08:46 small simple fix 21:08:51 jroll: i don't think so 21:08:55 nope 21:08:55 * johnthetubaguy just back from my rehearsal, running 21:08:56 there are many small simple fixes 21:09:06 jroll: stable/kilo backport is fine 21:09:09 but not holding up rc 21:09:12 *release 21:09:22 how often do backports release? 21:09:22 is there any big issue needing an RC3 ? really ? 21:09:25 nothing up is worth an rc3 at this point, IMHO 21:09:31 jroll: best for backporting I suspect now 21:09:36 jroll: there is a wiki for that somewhere 21:09:41 the stable maintainers plan those out i think 21:09:57 yeah, that's fine, just cringing at thinking about all the people asking why that doesn't work :P 21:09:59 thanks 21:10:01 kilo-backport-potential is the tag I think 21:10:01 https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Releases 21:10:08 mriedem: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=kilo-rc-potential sees nothing critical 21:10:11 johnthetubaguy_w: yeah, it's tagged 21:10:16 mriedem: we can just say no RC3 21:10:35 and do backporting to kilo if needed later 21:10:42 yeah 21:10:49 moving on? 21:10:51 bauzas: will have to be critical to trigger RC3 I would suspect, something might come up, but lets hope not 21:10:52 blueprints for liberty are open 21:10:57 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/liberty 21:11:06 specs are under review 21:11:07 johnthetubaguy: agreed, just not atm :) 21:11:23 so please target for liberty if you want to merge code in liberty 21:11:31 https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/liberty-1 21:11:48 mriedem: so we might stop using milestones like we used to 21:11:55 there is a wiki page on the new plan 21:11:59 i can't live w/o an integrated release 21:12:05 https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Cycle_Management/Liberty_Tracking 21:12:14 basically, just going to use milestones to say what shipped 21:12:20 * sc68cal is moving to a different room, brb 21:12:37 we never could predict when, so lets give up messing around with that, basically 21:12:42 +1 21:13:05 +1 21:13:12 cool 21:13:14 sounds great 21:13:30 so summit ideas, there is a plan for a nova-drivers meeting on monday, 21.00UTC I think 21:13:45 the time might change, but thats the general idea 21:13:46 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-nova-summit-ideas 21:13:52 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-nova-priorities 21:14:02 so please get your ideas in, so we can do a first pass 21:14:32 we need to pick deadlines etc, etc, and advertise them, but yeah, usual things really 21:15:11 I think we might try ask for pre-reading like we did last time, if that helped people? 21:15:40 I think that's a good idea 21:15:45 seemed to help 21:15:45 It makes the session more efficient 21:16:01 cool, I think it did too, lets do it 21:16:29 for feature discussion, I am thinking at least an outline of a spec, but lets see what suggestions we have for sessions I guess, and see what they each need 21:16:47 I guess people saw the timetable? 21:17:16 Tuesday: cross project/ops Wed, Thursday: Nova all day, Friday: meetup style 21:17:30 wed + thurs^ 21:17:39 thurs afternoon being a 2 block session on prioriites? 21:17:45 *priorities even 21:18:01 we didn't use the whole time in paris but it was helpful leading into friday 21:18:07 so we might have to move that down by one session and finish with nova-network, but yeah, that really helped 21:18:33 scroll down to the bottom I sketched a few idea in there, but they are random at this point 21:18:40 some of these are obvious 2 block sessions, like nova-network/neutron 21:18:46 but with topics like quotas, 21:18:59 that seems like a mess so not sure if it'll be 1 or 2 sessions worth 21:19:11 'we know there are problems, go!' 21:19:13 mriedem: we can splill over into the meetup at least 21:19:30 yeah...i'm just thinking, more prep work is needed there for a productive outcome 21:19:32 mriedem: I hope we get a bit more on the table for those, but lets see :) 21:19:42 mriedem: exactly what I was thinking 21:19:54 quotas one should have some pre-reading as based on what Vek says I think we can simplify things significantly 21:20:02 eh, sounds like Thrusday is already planned :) 21:20:56 yeah idk about some of these in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-nova-priorities 21:21:10 i mean, they are good, but some just sound like they are going to be a mess, 21:21:11 mriedem: yeah, +1 21:21:18 so the way I was thinking 21:21:22 e.g. pulling out virt drivers and/or scaling out reviews 21:21:28 Wednesday lets to non-ops related 21:21:36 Thursday, more ops-ey 21:21:39 oh ok 21:21:43 as there are no ops sessions on Thursday 21:21:52 but thats just a random scheduling idea 21:22:18 sounds a good idea - some issues are not related to only one component - like error logging 21:22:40 well, tuesday is cross-project day right? 21:22:44 monday is operators meetup 21:22:49 wed-thurs is project specifi 21:22:51 *specific 21:22:55 friday is pants off dance off 21:22:59 woo! 21:23:11 mriedem: roughly, but ops have stuff on Wed as well now 21:23:17 let me find the link... 21:23:30 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VsFdRYGbX5eCde81XDV7TrPBfEC7cgtOFikruYmqbPY/edit?usp=sharing 21:23:49 anyways, I guess we should move on, ideas please on the etherpads 21:24:10 i can't tell if it's better to do the nebulous / controversial talks earlier in the week or later 21:24:13 if you are wanting to lead something, do put your name down 21:24:50 mriedem: its tempting to leave some to friday afternoon, but they are more important than that really 21:25:13 last time, I think friday was full of things we found during the week, right? 21:25:24 yeah, we sure need to leave time for that 21:25:26 so I'm hestitant to plan to much so we don't lose that time to discuss things that come up 21:25:29 *too 21:25:37 thats fair 21:25:50 but its an excuse for only using one slot earlier in the week I guess 21:26:06 but hopefully that all becomes obvious 21:27:25 any more on liberty release stuff? 21:28:24 mriedem: is it time for bug chat? 21:28:37 yeah 21:28:38 gate is fine 21:28:39 http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/gate.html 21:28:44 busted yesterday, fixed today 21:28:53 there isn't anything in the agenda about bugs 21:29:03 hmm, there was 21:29:13 https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova 21:29:14 that was probably old 21:29:34 yeah it's blank now 21:29:37 dansmith: I updated it, honest, mostly deleted stuff 21:29:45 oh I see, yeah, nothing more in there 21:29:49 still working in getting shelving working better for multinode 21:30:00 https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1445569 21:30:00 Launchpad bug 1445569 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "No dhcp lease after shelve unshelve" [Undecided,Confirmed] 21:30:12 jogo: how is multinode generally? 21:30:20 johnthetubaguy: that is the last big issue actually 21:30:24 getting close to being able to gate on it 21:30:28 multinode is rocking 21:30:29 sweet 21:30:29 and make it default 21:30:36 http://jogo.github.io/gate/multinode.html 21:30:39 * johnthetubaguy group hug 21:30:40 very very rough numbers 21:30:46 looks really stable today 21:31:00 shelve was the last failure i saw on it too 21:31:06 (un)shelve 21:31:15 also, the cells job was green earlier in the week 21:31:16 possible fix https://review.openstack.org/#/c/85249/18 21:31:23 alaski: any regressions on the cells job? 21:31:30 so I think alaski was going to bring up making cells voting here 21:31:33 cells starting to pass, multi-node starting to pass, what is this strange planet I have landed on? 21:31:39 from what I've seen it's pretty stable 21:31:42 there have been a few failures in the cells job 21:31:45 not many though 21:31:53 alaski: are they cells-related or normal failures? 21:31:53 actual cells problems though? 21:31:59 jinx 21:32:01 alaski: failures as in instabilities in the test? 21:32:13 likely race conditions, haven't had a chance to dig 21:32:14 how far are we from voting on cells? 21:32:20 ahh 21:32:25 i guess we can check logstash 21:32:28 alaski: race conditions related the one we know ? 21:32:32 jogo: the point is, we're close 21:32:37 alaski: like on instance.save() ? 21:32:39 dansmith: \o/ 21:32:42 bauzas: very likely, need some time to confirm 21:32:55 alaski: okay, sounds like we need to bust it 21:33:02 anyway 21:33:05 so maybe plan for next week at the meeting, after we've had time to digest them? 21:33:20 yes, that would be good 21:33:21 plan to revisit and maybe make it voting, that is 21:33:34 +1 21:33:36 I have an idea for a fix as well, just need to do it 21:33:47 if it's what I think it is 21:34:59 so, moving on? 21:35:07 +1 21:35:17 yeah, only open discussion was a review request for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/174764/ 21:35:20 which isn't a stuck revivew 21:35:28 well, maybe 21:35:32 mikal: -1'ed 21:35:52 no 21:35:57 I don't think it's stuck 21:36:20 it might need a -2 due to an non-approved spec, but that seems harsh on a first time contribution 21:36:27 it's a spec 21:36:35 +1 21:36:40 I can't read, sorry 21:36:41 we need to digest it 21:36:43 but it might need a -2 based on the thing it's trying to do :) 21:37:01 I think this is, yet again, something we don't want to do in nova 21:37:02 it wants nova to do health monitoring of compute nodes to automatically fence them i think based on hw failures 21:37:15 not fencing, 21:37:24 dansmith: I am going to attempt a dev ref doc to describe those 21:37:24 just reporting health and scheduling based on it I think 21:37:42 johnthetubaguy: to describe what? 21:37:43 ok, didn't read the details, just mikal's response 21:38:09 johnthetubaguy: speaking of the sched efforts ? 21:38:12 we've been through this before with previous attempts to schedule based on link state, etc 21:38:29 that's all related to extensibility 21:38:37 dansmith: things like, not keen on orchestration in nova, etc, trying to describe the project scope a little, and keep a list of examples for when this stuff comes back around 21:38:43 atm, sounds hard to do that easily 21:38:44 it sounds like we could use some documentation on what is appropriate to feed into the scheduler 21:38:45 johnthetubaguy: ah, cool 21:39:02 alaski: yeah, thats very true 21:39:18 johnthetubaguy: sounds like it falls under what you just described 21:39:24 yep 21:39:29 I'd like to -2 with a url to why :) 21:39:41 dansmith: you are reading my mind 21:39:43 this falls under section 4 of "we don't do this" 21:40:11 devref/things-we-don't-do.rst 21:40:14 I will try do something like that, I think we might need it soon 21:40:17 lol 21:40:18 cool 21:40:44 well, that's actually a fair question ? what's a resource that the RT needs to track ? 21:40:59 but let's discuss that in the devref change :) 21:41:53 yep 21:42:00 so, what else? 21:42:09 I have a topic/request for discussion. 21:42:10 I think the agenda has run dry 21:42:19 So to summarize that review, dansmith agrees with me? 21:42:26 * sc68cal has a topic for open discussion 21:42:28 I'll get some sort of commemorative plague made immediately 21:42:31 mikal: and not even because I have to anymore! 21:42:44 I hope you meant plaque 21:42:49 haha 21:42:51 lol 21:42:54 lol 21:42:55 alaski: possibly, I need a dictionary 21:42:56 alaski: maybe not 21:43:19 dansmith: yeah, I'm not assuming 21:43:21 just a little plague.. like the sniffles and a localized rash 21:43:26 hah 21:43:34 so andreykurilin and sc68cal had things 21:43:44 andreykurilin: you're first 21:43:49 thanks) 21:43:52 bonus points for brevity 21:43:56 There is a chain of patches in novaclient related to support of microversion. Can I ask you to review them? They are already finished, just waiting for review and small fix in nova. 21:44:11 so that's not controversial this week? 21:44:12 I think we talked about this in a recent week, right? 21:44:13 it was last week 21:44:28 andreykurilin__: you got the link to those now? 21:44:33 last patch in chain https://review.openstack.org/#/c/136458/ 21:44:45 and thread in mailing http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-April/061183.html 21:46:15 speaking of microversions, i've been wondering about testing with those in tempest... 21:46:17 functional job is failed in last patch due to small bug in nova api side 21:46:18 but i'll wait 21:47:11 andreykurilin__: does that bug fix need a back port to kilo? 21:47:31 moving on? 21:47:34 mikal: it should be merged to master at first:) 21:47:35 * mriedem looks at clock 21:47:37 mikal: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/176817/ 21:47:50 mriedem: yes 21:47:57 its tagged so thats cool 21:48:05 sc68cal: you're up 21:48:11 * sc68cal prepares paste 21:48:14 If we could take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/168701/ ? It's the last patch before we can merge the dual stack testing change (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/160856/), that'd be great. 21:48:17 I know its not in agenda, but I would like to bring up http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/058779.html 21:48:39 and then 21:48:39 Cross-project coordination 21:48:39 http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-April/062327.html 21:48:46 * sc68cal is finished 21:49:05 sc68cal: has anyone said they'd be the nova counterpart there? 21:49:17 * mriedem nominates beagles 21:49:32 mriedem: i'll check the ml, but not to my knowledge 21:49:53 beagles has had some specs for redoing the neutronv2 api in nova, so that's why i threw him under the bus 21:50:24 ok, lennyb? 21:50:25 mriedem, I was thinking of stepping forward, but I wanted to make sure I have support from the PTB before doing so... as it happens my PTBs happen to be on holiday the last couple of days 21:50:32 PTB? 21:50:37 powers that be 21:50:38 mriedem, yeah 21:50:50 beagles: understandable 21:51:04 in any case... I'd like to play part regardless 21:51:11 lennyb: i'm all for pci ci 21:51:12 in nova 21:51:20 we have intel ci so what's the difference with mellanox pci ci? 21:51:43 tests their adapters, I assume 21:51:46 they have a different vif driver, right? 21:51:52 We are asking to permit us non voting nova ci. 21:52:04 mriedem, that'd be my guess, Intel CI only tests intel NICs 21:52:08 to clarify they just want permission to comment 21:52:08 yeah, i was wondering if there was some non-vendor pci code that the mellanox job hits which the intel one doesn't 21:52:36 yes 21:52:37 b/c it's my understanding that the intel pci ci is pretty limited to the configuration it tests 21:52:38 I think the email might have been interpreted as them requesting voting permissions, which they aren't at the moment 21:52:39 the vif driver 21:52:40 we have our own cards and drivers 21:52:45 anteaya: it says commenting 21:52:48 lennyb: I guess you publish the list of tempest tests you run? 21:52:52 dansmith: yes 21:52:58 lennyb: is it even tempest? 21:53:23 intel pci ci isn't *tempest* per se, it's their own tests in a tempest framework 21:53:27 and i don't know if those tests are on github 21:53:48 lennyb: so is your test code in the open somewhere? 21:53:56 mriedem, it's tempest 21:54:09 perfect, sounds like we want it then 21:54:25 how do tempest tests test the PCI bits? 21:54:25 but is it http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/ ? 21:54:29 hopefully it's tempest plus some pci bits right? 21:54:38 yes, i assume that's what it is ^ 21:54:43 I didn't think we had much if any tempest pci tests 21:54:47 we don't 21:54:55 i'm wondering if the extra bits are on github 21:54:58 and we are working to add more tests to SRiOV 21:54:59 so if not, then it's not testing much 21:55:04 is that not just boot a VM sorts of tests? if its SRiOV 21:55:35 johnthetubaguy: depends on the flavor and configuration I guess 21:55:48 very true 21:55:50 how about this, 21:55:59 there are also different port configurations like direct 21:56:16 lennyb: can you post to the ML about what you're running now, what it's covering other than what we have with infra, what your plans are for the future, and links to code and reports? 21:56:18 dansmith: do we have that list of test requirements still? 21:56:31 I think we don't need to spend time on the meeting discussing this, we just need to have details to look at 21:56:43 johnthetubaguy: it's probably very out of date 21:56:58 johnthetubaguy: and not quite aimed at this specifically 21:57:09 just for perspective, this is why they begin commenting, so that you can look at what they provide and they can fill in gaps as they go along 21:57:27 anteaya: I think we just want some indication that it's testing useful things 21:57:34 anteaya: but also, that's why we don't really need to discuss it here I think 21:57:39 dansmith: that's fine 21:57:46 let's just get some more details, and plan to follow up on the ML 21:58:01 sounds like we ask questions on the ML thread, which is cool 21:58:05 they have just been trying to get some response for 2 months is all 21:58:06 and anteaya and lennyb can poke johnthetubaguy mriedem and myself if it's not answered in a few days, okay? 21:58:14 dansmith: can do, thank you 21:58:20 dansmith: I will post to ML. 21:58:23 cool 21:58:27 johnthetubaguy: mriedem cool with that? 21:58:29 thanks 21:58:31 yes 21:58:34 dansmith: +1 21:58:35 2 min left 21:58:36 let's close 21:58:43 please :) 21:58:47 +1 21:58:49 #endmeeting