21:00:04 <melwitt> #startmeeting nova
21:00:05 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Dec  6 21:00:04 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is melwitt. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:00:06 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:00:08 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'nova'
21:00:19 <melwitt> hello team, welcome to the nova meeting
21:00:33 <takashin> o/
21:00:35 <mriedem> o/
21:01:07 <melwitt> hm, this might be a short one with just us
21:01:12 <melwitt> let's make a start
21:01:20 <edleafe> \o
21:01:23 <melwitt> #topic Release News
21:01:30 <melwitt> #link Stein release schedule: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/Stein_Release_Schedule
21:01:40 <melwitt> milestone 2 is coming up early next year Jan 10
21:01:53 <melwitt> and soon people are going to start going on holiday PTO
21:02:14 <melwitt> so I was wondering if anyone thought it would be a good idea to do another spec review day next week ahead of s-2 spec freeze?
21:02:30 <melwitt> I sent a mail to the ML but no responses
21:02:49 <melwitt> so it seemed like maybe people don't think it's needed
21:03:20 <mriedem> i am ambivalent
21:03:29 <mriedem> runways aren't getting attention,
21:03:38 <mriedem> i don't know where we are with stuff we've already approved,
21:03:42 <mriedem> or themes set out at the ptg
21:03:56 <melwitt> ok
21:03:56 <mriedem> so i'm a big meh on spending a lot of time reviewing more specs, especially when a lot of people don't review them
21:04:32 <melwitt> that's fair
21:04:59 <dansmith> I'm kinda -0.9 on spec days in general, but definitely not interested in spending one of the days of my last week this year on it
21:05:33 <dansmith> also seems like we've got a lot of things approved already, and not much going through the gate, but I could be wrong
21:05:40 <mriedem> the gate is f'ed
21:05:50 <melwitt> mriedem: based on what you said though, I'll put together an etherpad with our approved blueprints so we can start tracking (I had been originally going to wait until spec freeze). and also on there put all the items for the themes
21:05:51 <dansmith> seems like it has been effed for a while
21:05:53 <mriedem> so yes, half our time is spent rechecking things, if they even get reviewed
21:06:46 <melwitt> ok, I appreciate the input. I'll reply to myself on the ML that we're gonna not do a spec review day
21:07:30 <melwitt> and I don't know the latest on what's going on with the gate, so I'll look to see if there's some way I can help there
21:07:41 <melwitt> thanks for mentioning it
21:08:14 <melwitt> #link Stein runway etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-runways-stein
21:08:25 <melwitt> #link runway #1: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/initial-allocation-ratios (yikun) [END 2018-12-10] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/initial-allocation-ratios+(status:open+OR+status:merged)
21:08:34 <melwitt> #link runway #2: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/local-disk-serial-numbers (mdbooth) [END 2018-12-14] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/local-disk-serial-numbers+(status:open+OR+status:merged)
21:08:41 <melwitt> #link runway #3 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/live-migration-force-after-timeout (yikun) [END 2018-12-19] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/live-migration-force-after-timeout+(status:open+OR+status:merged)
21:09:01 <mriedem> #1 is approved, except docs patches at the end
21:09:06 <mriedem> which ta da need review
21:09:21 <mriedem> so we could drop it from the runway queue if we care
21:09:25 <mriedem> or just recheck it the rest of the week
21:09:54 <mriedem> i'll also mention reshaper was dropped for the 2nd time
21:10:09 <melwitt> yeah :(
21:10:45 <dansmith> if #1 is still in the gate and has un-reviewed stuff, I say leave it in the runway
21:11:02 <melwitt> I need to poke bauzas about responding to the -1 on the patch
21:11:24 <melwitt> dansmith: yeah, might as well
21:12:33 <melwitt> ok, so we really need to review what's in the runways. I'll review the docs patches and take a look at the other runways too
21:13:05 <melwitt> anything else for release news?
21:13:13 <melwitt> #topic Bugs (stuck/critical)
21:13:23 <melwitt> no critical bugz
21:13:31 <melwitt> #link 58 new untriaged bugs (up 4 since the last meeting): https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New
21:13:49 <melwitt> this count ^ was 64 yesterday, so big ol thanks for mriedem for doing a bunch of triage
21:14:02 <melwitt> #link 12 untagged untriaged bugs (up 3 since the last meeting): https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=-*&field.status%3Alist=NEW
21:14:43 <melwitt> and thanks to all for staying vigilant on tagging bugs. we need to triage those tags
21:14:48 <melwitt> #link bug triage how-to: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/BugTriage#Tags
21:14:53 <melwitt> #help need help with bug triage
21:14:58 <melwitt> Gate status
21:15:05 <melwitt> #link check queue gate status http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/index.html
21:15:38 <melwitt> 64% classification rate for the integrated gate
21:16:13 <mriedem> might be time for a summary email to the ML from clarkb
21:16:27 <melwitt> yeah, I was just thinking the same
21:16:29 <mriedem> b/c between zuul restarts, slow nodes, and lots of other issues i don't know what's on fire
21:16:38 <mriedem> beyond everything
21:16:41 <clarkb> well its all on fire :P
21:16:45 <mriedem> jinx
21:17:08 <clarkb> I've been mostly looking at tripleo resets recently as they have higher cost
21:17:18 <mriedem> can we just like, not run CI on tripleo?
21:17:25 <melwitt> haha
21:17:39 <clarkb> but integrated gate continues to show py3 test flakyness and neutron functional is perpetually unhappy
21:17:59 <mriedem> if i were to conjure sdague of old,
21:18:06 <mriedem> we'd probably be making things non-voting
21:18:20 <clarkb> the slow nodes dont help but arent the only bugs, its more that they are really great at showing whhere we are inefficient
21:18:34 <mriedem> yes the n-api things were good to find
21:18:49 <dansmith> I have some patches up for those rpc things
21:18:56 <dansmith> but we're still waiting for the first run
21:19:04 <mriedem> same for the client inits
21:19:06 <dansmith> should have those by tomorrow (eek)
21:19:18 <melwitt> gr8t
21:19:34 <clarkb> but noted I should write an email
21:19:39 <mriedem> thanks
21:19:41 <clarkb> will try to get to that after lunch
21:19:55 <melwitt> clarkb: yeah, your email last time was awesome. thank you for doing it
21:20:34 <dansmith> are we like, moving on here?
21:20:45 <melwitt> #link patch to help with slow node failures https://review.openstack.org/623282
21:20:48 <melwitt> I was looking for links
21:21:12 <melwitt> *patches
21:21:15 <mriedem> and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/623246/
21:21:23 <mriedem> and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/623265/
21:21:35 <melwitt> thank you
21:21:37 <melwitt> ok
21:21:46 <melwitt> 3rd party CI
21:21:54 <melwitt> #link 3rd party CI status http://ciwatch.mmedvede.net/project?project=nova&time=7+days
21:22:01 <melwitt> new link for this apparently
21:22:14 <melwitt> ooh, this one's a lot faster
21:22:45 <melwitt> ok, anything else on bugs, gate, CI?
21:22:56 <melwitt> #topic Reminders
21:23:03 <melwitt> #link Stein Subteam Patches n Bugs: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stein-nova-subteam-tracking
21:23:17 <melwitt> anyone else have any reminders?
21:23:29 <melwitt> ok
21:23:31 <melwitt> #topic Stable branch status
21:23:40 <melwitt> #link stable/rocky: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/rocky,n,z
21:24:01 <melwitt> bunch of reviews needed
21:24:12 <melwitt> #link stable/queens: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/queens,n,z
21:24:18 <melwitt> #link stable/pike: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/pike,n,z
21:24:41 <melwitt> we release rocky recently but not queens and pike. so we can consider doing a queens and pike release
21:25:21 <melwitt> I think we should, but have to flush out the reviews
21:25:41 <melwitt> I'll spend some time on stable reviews this week
21:25:48 <melwitt> anything else for stable?
21:26:04 <melwitt> #topic Subteam Highlights
21:26:21 <melwitt> I think efried_cya_jan is off on PTO
21:26:28 <edleafe> yep
21:26:32 <efried_cya_jan> true story
21:26:33 <edleafe> I can summarize
21:26:39 <melwitt> ok, great
21:26:41 <edleafe> oh, you want to do it?
21:26:48 <efried_cya_jan> no, please go ahead
21:26:55 <edleafe> We discussed the motion to move os-resource-classes to its own OpenStack repo
21:26:58 <edleafe> The consensus (without jaypipes present) was that simpler was better, so we went with cdent's repo
21:27:01 <edleafe> edleafe agreed to do the necessary paperwork with infra
21:27:04 <edleafe> #link Add os-resource-classes https://review.openstack.org/#/c/621666/
21:27:07 <edleafe> We discussed the nova-to-placement traffic reduction series now starting at
21:27:10 <edleafe> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/615646/
21:27:12 <edleafe> Also discussed this contribution from zzzeek:
21:27:15 <edleafe> #link data fixture cleanup https://review.openstack.org/#/c/621304/
21:27:17 <edleafe> Under bugs, we talked about:
21:27:20 <edleafe> #link ensure aggregates under load https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1804453
21:27:21 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1804453 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "maximum recursion possible while setting aggregates in placement" [Undecided,New]
21:27:23 <edleafe> This only shows under a heavy recursive loop; agreed to discuss further after the meeting
21:27:26 <edleafe> EOM
21:27:34 <melwitt> cool, thanks
21:28:21 <melwitt> I spoke to jaypipes in #openstack-placement yesterday about the os-resource-classes proposal and he is OK with it though not preferred approach
21:28:56 <melwitt> so I'll be acking those patches
21:29:00 <edleafe> It did seem a bit heavy for something that shouldn't be changing very often
21:29:21 <melwitt> yeah, I saw pros and cons with either way
21:30:04 <melwitt> ok, next API, no notes from gmann
21:30:13 <melwitt> anything else for subteams?
21:30:32 <melwitt> #topic Stuck Reviews
21:30:47 <melwitt> no items in the agenda, so I assume we skip it
21:30:53 <melwitt> #topic Open discussion
21:30:59 <melwitt> I have one item here
21:31:04 <melwitt> (melwitt): hallway track from summit - operator contributed patch to add extend volume support for RBD https://review.openstack.org/613039. Question: specless blueprint or spec needed?
21:31:30 <mriedem> libvirt volume driver feature parity is traditionally specless bp
21:31:50 <melwitt> ah, good point
21:31:52 <gaudenz> hi I'm the operator in question. I'm here to today if you have any questions specific. I added a response on the review.
21:32:04 <mriedem> we do have tempest testing for that feature though, so as i've said to him before, i'd want to see the ceph job passing on that change with that test enabled
21:32:15 <gaudenz> Other similar changes have been done in the past without a spec: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/554679/
21:32:35 <mriedem> gaudenz: spec != blueprint
21:32:45 <melwitt> gaudenz: right. this will be a specless blueprint. so all you need to do is create a launchpad blueprint with the summary and link it to the patch
21:32:48 <mriedem> and that was like 15 LOC
21:33:21 <melwitt> I can help with running the ceph job on the change with extend volume enabled
21:33:59 <gaudenz> melwitt: I can do that. So just a summary on launchpad to be able to link any other changes (tempest?) that would be needed?
21:34:15 <gaudenz> Or is there an approval process for specless blueprints too?
21:34:27 <mriedem> we'd approve it after this meeting,
21:34:29 <melwitt> gaudenz: yes. you'll mention the blueprint in the commit message of any changes related to it
21:34:34 <mriedem> tempest already has a test,
21:34:37 <mriedem> the ceph job doesn't run it
21:35:21 <gaudenz> So I would need to do a change to tempest to enable this. right? I guess that should be fairly easy to do.
21:35:25 <melwitt> gaudenz: I'm familiar with the ceph job so I can add the patch for having the ceph job run the already existing tempest test
21:35:28 <mriedem> in fact, the ceph job test blacklist used to be in nova but i forget where it moved
21:35:34 <melwitt> gaudenz: or I can just show you what to do
21:35:44 <mriedem> https://github.com/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/blob/master/tempest_blacklist.txt
21:35:46 <gaudenz> melwitt: yes would be appreciated.
21:35:54 <mriedem> the extend test is probably marked slow...
21:36:17 <mriedem> anyway, move that to -nova
21:36:27 <melwitt> ok, cool. thanks
21:36:48 <melwitt> alright, that's all from the agenda
21:36:59 <melwitt> anything else people want to talk about before we call it?
21:37:24 <melwitt> ok, thanks everyone
21:37:27 <melwitt> #endmeeting