16:00:04 #startmeeting nova 16:00:04 Meeting started Tue Jul 26 16:00:04 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is bauzas. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:04 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:04 The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 16:00:10 hello folks 16:00:39 o/ 16:01:15 who's around ? 16:01:32 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova#Agenda_for_next_meeting 16:02:04 o/ 16:02:14 ok let's start, people will join 16:02:23 #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) 16:02:33 #info No Critical bug 16:02:40 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 10 new untriaged bugs (+0 since the last meeting) 16:02:47 #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/openstack/placement 27 open stories (+0 since the last meeting) in Storyboard for Placement 16:02:54 #info Add yourself in the team bug roster if you want to help https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-bug-triage-roster 16:03:11 o/ 16:03:23 given I'll be on PTO after the next meeting, I can be the next bug baton owner for this week 16:03:43 elodilles: sorry, but I'll take it for this week :p 16:03:51 :'( 16:03:58 no problem of course :D 16:04:02 hah 16:04:03 elodilles: you can have mine if you want ;) 16:04:14 #info Next bug baton is passed to bauzas 16:04:25 that's it for bugs 16:04:33 we'll discuss the CI outage in the next topic 16:04:44 any other bug to discuss ? 16:05:23 looks not 16:05:30 #topic Gate status 16:05:40 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs 16:05:45 so, 16:05:52 you maybe have seen my emails 16:05:59 the gate is blocked at the moment 16:06:06 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1940425 gate blocker 16:06:43 I triaged the bug status to invalid for nova as this is an os-vif/neutron issue 16:07:00 #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-July/029725.html 16:07:07 the ML thread ^ 16:07:32 please don't recheck your changes until we merge an os-vif version blocker 16:07:40 for 3.0.0 16:08:18 now, once the os-vif blocker will be merged, we'll still need to find a way to use os-vif 3.0.x 16:09:54 do people want to know more ? 16:10:07 or can we continue ? 16:10:49 mmmm ok 16:11:24 then, let's continur 16:11:36 the periodic job runs 16:11:43 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fplacement&pipeline=periodic-weekly Placement periodic job status 16:11:50 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-integrated-compute-centos-9-stream&project=openstack%2Fnova&pipeline=periodic-weekly&skip=0 Centos 9 Stream periodic job status 16:11:57 #link https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=nova-emulation&pipeline=periodic-weekly&skip=0 Emulation periodic job runs 16:12:17 I don't see any problem with all of them ^ 16:12:24 always good to see passing jobs 16:12:31 :) 16:12:49 would love to see nova-next and grenade passing too, but meh :) 16:13:02 we cannot have it all :) 16:13:23 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/850242 16:13:26 is stilll pending 16:13:40 yup, i guessed it 16:13:46 to move centos job to perodic weekly only 16:13:54 can we ping anyone in tempest to expidite that 16:13:56 as I saw we continue to have check and gate jobs for those 16:14:04 sean-k-mooney: maybe gmann ? 16:14:12 perhaps 16:14:21 yeah gmann and kopecmartin 16:14:25 illl add them as a review 16:15:14 cool 16:15:28 #info Please look at the gate failures and file a bug report with the gate-failure tag. 16:15:34 #info STOP DOING BLIND RECHECKS aka. 'recheck' https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/testing.html#how-to-handle-test-failures 16:16:26 next topic then 16:16:31 #topic Release Planning 16:16:37 #link https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html 16:16:47 #info Zed-3 is in 5 weeks 16:17:05 #topic Review priorities 16:17:11 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement+OR+project:openstack/os-traits+OR+project:openstack/os-resource-classes+OR+project:openstack/os-vif+OR+project:openstack/python-novaclient+OR+project:openstack/osc-placement)+label:Review-Priority%252B1 16:17:17 ah shit 16:17:22 I forgot to change the url 16:17:41 should create a bit.ly I guess 16:18:18 #undo 16:18:18 Removing item from minutes: #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement+OR+project:openstack/os-traits+OR+project:openstack/os-resource-classes+OR+project:openstack/os-vif+OR+project:openstack/python-novaclient+OR+project:openstack/osc-placement)+label:Review-Priority%252B1 16:18:23 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement+OR+project:openstack/os-traits+OR+project:openstack/os-resource-classes+OR+project:openstack/os-vif+OR+project:openstack/python-novaclient+OR+project:openstack/osc-placement)+(label:Review-Priority%252B1+OR+label:Review-Priority%252B2) 16:18:52 as you see, we need to merge the 2.91 patch 16:19:02 but given the CI outage, we can't do it yet 16:19:23 i think the requirements patch should merge in then next hour 16:19:23 any review-prio to discuss ? 16:19:32 so likely wont be much longer 16:19:35 sean-k-mooney: oh haven't seen an update yet 16:19:46 it has +w i think 16:19:54 so it should be in the gate as we speak 16:20:15 nice 16:20:29 we already have the nova change for i 16:20:30 it 16:20:49 can we move to the stable branches topic ? 16:22:22 yes 16:22:30 cool 16:22:36 #topic Stable Branches 16:22:51 * bauzas gives the mic to elodilles 16:22:58 :) 16:23:06 yes, so 16:23:24 actually i haven't updated the stable section, as the state is the same as last week :/ 16:23:30 #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci 16:23:36 and train is blocked :/ 16:23:51 i could spend only a little time to look at the train gate issue 16:24:08 (devstack-gate is failing to install python3-yaml) 16:24:09 is the shell issue still blocked byu another issue 16:24:21 sean-k-mooney: yepp 16:24:45 if only nova-grenade would fail i'd suggest to set it non-voting 'temporarily' 16:24:59 (especially as it is stable/train which is quite old) 16:25:00 ya that might be the path forward 16:25:21 but unfortunately nova-live-migration also fails with the same issue 16:25:40 so it would mean two jobs :/ 16:26:00 failing to install python3-yaml 16:26:07 though the good part would be to have less intermittent failure to catch :P 16:26:11 is it a dist tools failure 16:26:22 i.e. pip refusing to upgrade it 16:26:32 sean-k-mooney: i don't know as it gets timed out 16:26:40 and we don't have logs either :/ 16:26:48 becasue python3-yaml is one of those packages i alway unitlly form the disto before i run devstack 16:26:52 ack 16:26:54 i mean only the jobs-output.txt 16:27:28 the last line we see is the processing triggers from libc-bin 16:27:35 then it hangs for 2 hrs 16:28:04 oh hum + /opt/stack/new/devstack-gate/functions.sh:apt_get_install:L71: sudo DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get --assume-yes install python3-yaml 16:28:13 so its explcitly being installed form the distor in that job 16:28:31 yes, from devstack-gate 16:28:37 which is the the opicit of what i normally do 16:29:27 locally this works fine for me with the same packages (if i checked them correctly) 16:29:41 so still could not reproduce 16:30:33 that's it for what i can tell for now :/ 16:31:34 ack 16:32:00 it does look like it jut hang proceeign the triggers fo libc-bin 16:32:28 as a workaround we could add a pre playbook to do a full update/upgade of the packages and preinstall that 16:32:31 and see if it helped 16:32:32 i wonder if there is some weird package prompt stalling the process 16:32:43 yes, otherwise we should see some continuation from the devstack-gate script 16:33:10 sudo DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get --assume-yes install python3-yaml 16:33:17 so its being pulled in form that but 16:33:25 --assume-yes and noninteractive 16:33:29 shoudl disable all prompts 16:33:53 anyway we proably can move on 16:33:55 ill see if I cant dedicate some time this week to take a look. 16:34:34 thanks! 16:34:39 cool, moving on then 16:34:46 and thanks all for discussing it 16:34:47 for the workaround suggestion, too, sean-k-mooney 16:35:10 bauzas: ++ 16:35:16 #topic Open discussion 16:35:24 (bauzas) will be on PTO between Aug 3rd and Aug 29th, who would want to chair the 3 meetings ? 16:35:36 * bauzas needs to visit Corsica 16:35:55 or do we need to cancel those ? 16:36:09 I'd prefer the former honestly, given we're on zed-3 16:36:09 I think I can take them 16:36:23 gibi: <3 16:36:35 I'll be back on time before the 3rd milestone 16:36:35 9th, 16th, 23rd 16:36:54 should even be around on IRC on Monday but shhhtttt 16:37:46 #action gibi to chair 3 nova meetings (Aug 9th, 16th and 23rd) 16:38:04 bauzas, can we define the microversion for virtiofs/manila ? 16:38:07 I'll chair next week's meeting 16:38:13 Uggla: good question 16:38:33 I was about to write an email for asking people to look at https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-zed-microversions-plan 16:38:51 but given we had the CI outage from last week, I didn't had time to do it 16:39:37 to be fair, I'll write the email to ask people to propose their microversion changes if they think they're already done 16:40:02 Uggla: for the moment, plan to use 2.93 16:40:24 ok sounds good to me. 16:41:35 melwitt wrote something for last meeting but we hadn't time to discuss about it AFAIR 16:41:42 (melwitt) I will not be at the meeting today but in case you missed it, I'm seeking input regarding terminology used in the currently named "ephemeral encryption" feature spec and patches: https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-July/029546.html. If you have thoughts on whether the terminology should be changed to something other than "ephemeral encryption", please comment on the ML thread or on this pa 16:41:42 tch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/764486 (thank you gibi for adding a comment 🙂) 16:42:10 sounds a new naming bikeshed \o/ 16:43:01 any opinions about a possible good name instead of "ephemeral encryption" ? 16:43:12 reminder : I'm terrible at naming things 16:44:11 sean-k-mooney: to be fair, we name "ephemeral disks" disks that are created and aren't volumes 16:44:22 and are persisted 16:44:34 ephmeral disks are only the disk created form flavor.ephmeral 16:44:55 so to me it wrong ot ever use it in any other context 16:45:05 if you have a flavor with DISK_GB=10, correct me if I'm wrong but you'll get a 10GB disk that will be an "ephemeral disk" 16:45:23 (not a BFV I mean) 16:45:57 no 16:46:05 that is incorrect terminology 16:46:10 and what im objecting too 16:46:13 local vs volume, root vs ephermeral, these are the terminologies in the API doc 16:46:28 right 16:46:33 https://docs.openstack.org/arch-design/design-storage/design-storage-concepts.html 16:46:48 Ephemeral storage - If you only deploy OpenStack Compute service (nova), by default your users do not have access to any form of persistent storage. The disks associated with VMs are ephemeral, meaning that from the user’s point of view they disappear when a virtual machine is terminated. 16:47:07 we name them "ephemeral" because we delete the disk when the instance is removed 16:47:21 and we delete volumes as well if so configured :D 16:47:26 whihc is not correct 16:47:40 deleting somting at the end of its lifetime does not make it epmeral 16:48:05 technically, you can have ephemeral disks on shared storage (NFS) 16:48:07 if we delete a volume we also expect the data to be removed 16:48:14 or ceph 16:48:20 if you use the rbd image_backend 16:48:37 sean-k-mooney: I don't disagree with you, I'm just explaining our docs 16:49:17 yep 16:50:05 not only our upstream docs btw... https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openstack_platform/16.2/html/creating_and_managing_instances/con_types-of-instance-storage_osp :) 16:50:12 so i would prefer something like local_disk_encryption, instance_disk_encypriton or similar 16:50:29 bauzas: right but there are many other things wrong with our downstream docs 16:50:32 +1 on local disk encryption 16:51:55 I'd prefer local disk encryption over instance disk encryption 16:51:58 im not going to block this progressing on the name 16:52:22 i just find the usage of ephmeral to rever to storage tied to the vms lifecycle to be mildly insulting 16:52:26 because an instance disk can either be "ephemeral" (from local libvirt disk), or something else 16:53:02 technically, this ephemeral storage is actually our virt driver local storage 16:53:21 depending on the virt driver you use 16:53:30 its not nessiarly local 16:53:33 tell ironic about it :) 16:53:44 well for libvirt or vmware 16:53:47 yeah, see, I made that mistake 16:53:51 the storage can be clusterd or remote 16:53:55 shared storage is ephemeral 16:54:05 so, not local 16:54:08 this is why i dont like using that term 16:54:18 hey o/ thanks for discussing the naming bikeshed :) just wanted to get some confidence that ppl would prefer a name change and lessen the possibility of someone coming to the review later and saying "why did you change this, it should be changed back to ephemeral" 16:54:27 ephemeral is ambiguious 16:54:38 as is "evacuate" :D 16:54:53 our Gods of Naming didn't help 16:55:09 maybe we need dansmith to write another blog post 16:55:20 problem solved. 16:55:20 melwitt: ack so i guess the real question is 16:55:28 #action dansmith to write a blogpost 16:55:31 do we think channging the name will make thing clearer 16:55:35 heh 16:55:45 oh, snap, he saw it 16:55:46 :) 16:55:46 #undo 16:55:46 Removing item from minutes: #action dansmith to write a blogpost 16:55:52 In general, I'm not for renaming things like this 16:56:05 I'm not against renaming ity 16:56:17 I just wanted to make sure we all agree on what this is 16:56:30 ephemeral is a bad name, but that's a name we already use 16:56:34 because you'll end up with all old docs being inaccurate for new stuff, and people who already understand this will also have to change 16:56:46 that was one of my concerns 16:56:47 if we pick something else, this has to be better understandable about what it is 16:57:19 yeah, if we need to write some doc explaining "ephemeral" == "this new thing" this is bad 16:57:39 hence the challenge 16:58:00 so this is considered a non fixable terminology mistake of the past? 16:58:08 like tenant ? :) 16:58:15 we are fixing tenant 16:58:22 well to me that doc that is erfernce is not a nova doc 16:58:25 I know, I'm opening a can of worms 16:58:26 so we could jsut fix it 16:58:45 and pretend it never existed, heh ? :) 16:59:09 we're running out of time, but for the sake of the conversation, let's continue 16:59:13 well from my point of view the only thing that nova ever said was ephemreal is the falvor.ephemeral storage disks 16:59:22 I'll just formally end the meeting at the top of the hour 16:59:56 melwitt: are we encypting the flavor.epmermal disks by the way 17:00:00 or just root and swap 17:00:11 problem is 17:00:17 i thikn we will be encypting all 3 types 17:00:17 root is also "ephemeral" 17:00:28 (depending on the conf options) 17:00:28 bauzas: it depend on the difinition 17:00:31 form our api its not 17:00:39 sean-k-mooney: what is "flavor.ephemeral"? it is encrypting the root disk and any other attached local disks 17:01:09 in our flavor we have 3 types of storage 17:01:11 correct, the point is that *by default, we don't do any difference between root disk and other local (or non-local on shared) disk 17:01:21 root, swap and ephemeral 17:01:39 https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/user/flavors.html 17:01:50 ok, this is encrypting root and ephemeral, and not swap 17:01:56 right 17:02:00 about the new feature 17:02:18 so we proably should be encyrpting swap too but we can maybe add that next cycle 17:02:58 swap is out of scope AFAICT 17:03:10 im not sure why it would be 17:03:35 we declared it out of scope for this cycle i guess 17:03:47 but i would hope it woudl get done before we condire this fully complete 17:03:48 because swap isn't using QEMU file-based storage ? 17:03:54 it is 17:04:00 depending on your backend 17:04:11 f*** 17:04:12 it will use a qcow files or a rbd volume 17:04:16 I'm not expert on swap 17:04:41 then, all disks (root, swap and others) go into a same bucket 17:04:57 which is by default the virt driver storage backend 17:05:07 basically this is encrypting things that are under the 'ephemerals' and 'image' keys in block_device_info: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826529/7/nova/virt/driver.py#107 17:05:40 'swap' has its own key in block_device_info 17:06:45 so ephemerals should be the storage form flavor.ephemeral_gb 17:06:49 do we know if https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html?highlight=ephemeral#DEFAULT.default_ephemeral_format is also used for root and swap ? 17:07:01 image is presumable the storage form flavor.root_gb 17:07:05 I don't know the reason swap is not included and I just checked the specs again and don't find it mentioned why 17:07:24 bauzas: no i belive that is for ephemeral_gb only 17:08:29 bauzas if you dont specy how you want flavor.ephemeral_gb to be devied up on the server create api request 17:08:38 we use that config to determin the format 17:08:53 and we provide a single ephemeral disk 17:09:27 but you can ask for nova to provide multiple disks as long as the total is equal to or less then flavor.ephemeral_gb 17:09:56 looks like I need to end this meeting 17:10:01 but let's continue 17:10:02 this gets modeled in the block device mapping info passed in the api request 17:10:04 ack 17:10:07 #endmeeting