17:00:16 #startmeeting nova_cells 17:00:17 Meeting started Wed Aug 3 17:00:16 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is alaski. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:20 The meeting name has been set to 'nova_cells' 17:00:25 ohai 17:00:30 o/ 17:00:32 o/ 17:00:58 I'm not sure we have much to cover at this point so let's roll through this 17:01:03 #topic Testing 17:01:24 dansmith: I think you agreed to do a thing here involving grenade? 17:01:36 did I? 17:01:41 doesn't sound like me. 17:01:43 he did 17:01:50 what did I promise to do? 17:02:32 L396 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-newton-midcycle 17:02:36 somewhere around in there 17:02:42 Forcing this is contingent on grenade testing. (TODO: dansmith) 17:02:49 yeah, what mriedem said 17:03:08 I'm going to assume there's nothing to report here then 17:03:12 yeah that was the todo 17:03:20 the other was investigating some rpc/db switching stuff 17:03:35 um 17:03:40 ot 17:03:57 it is not clicking for me, but nothing to report obviously.. we can chat after the meeting to get it back in my head 17:04:15 okay 17:04:25 moving on 17:04:29 steps: expand db, roll new code, things still work, then run the command, we don't lose stuff in between b/c we assume there is a single cell setup and we can do things as before cells v2 17:04:35 i think it was just having something run through the upgrade in grenade 17:04:39 from no cells to cells v2 17:05:09 yeah, that rings a bell 17:05:13 #topic Open Reviews 17:05:42 so let's discuss what we're going to push for in Newton 17:05:53 dansmith: what's the status of aggregates? 17:05:58 I didn't see if that merged 17:06:01 merged 17:06:03 like a mofo 17:06:05 excellent 17:06:35 melwitt: what's the status of instance groups? does that need review at this point? 17:07:14 alaski: yes, it's all ready for review 17:07:23 great 17:07:39 dansmith reviewed it recently and I updated it to address the comments 17:07:46 I don't think it's critical for N, but would help simplify upgrades 17:08:00 yeah, we should try to get it in if we can I think 17:08:18 agreed 17:08:29 I'll add it to my queue 17:09:04 I just pushed up a new revision to my series on deleting instances and then includin build_requests in instance show 17:09:20 what about quota? 17:09:25 I have a few more patches to add covering instance list and scheduling to a cell 17:09:28 alaski: you're going to pick that up right? (I hope) 17:10:02 I'm happy (not really) to look at that once I get my current series in shape 17:10:17 i've been through https://review.openstack.org/#/c/325985/ a few times already so should be good to push there 17:10:25 alaski: i'm going to have to ask you to push me on ^ though 17:10:31 i.e. badger me 17:10:35 can do 17:10:55 * dansmith doubts alaski's abilities 17:11:27 I think you all impressed upon me the need to be more aggressive, though it's against my natur 17:11:30 e 17:11:38 yeah, but I have seen no change of behavior 17:11:41 you're as nice as ever 17:12:07 heh, fair point. I'll see what I can do 17:12:24 * alaski cracks a whip 17:12:29 probably nicer 17:12:32 * dansmith quakes in his boots 17:12:44 there's a review up for a simple migration command for cellsv2 17:12:46 'they told me to be mean, so i probably did something wrong and need to be extra nice now!' 17:12:53 mriedem: lol 17:12:54 lol 17:13:22 we'll need that nova-manage cmd for grenade 17:13:40 the only other series I can think of right now for N is the rpc switching from melwitt 17:13:50 I'm already +2 on the migration command IIRC 17:13:54 yep 17:13:56 so crack that whip somewhere else 17:14:03 * mriedem watches his behind 17:14:15 is anything up yet for the list stuff? 17:14:31 not yet, that's my next patch 17:14:32 there was quite a bit of talk about what to do with listing instances 17:14:33 ok 17:14:44 that series was 8 patches long for a while, so I deferred 17:14:45 we also talked about restricting sort_keys for list, which i opened a bug for yesterday 17:15:08 but that could be done in parallel 17:15:28 yeah 17:15:51 the real value of that is if it's a small enough set of data that we could keep in in the api db 17:16:06 then we don't need to query each cell, or elasticsearch, to get the set of instances 17:16:08 alaski: I was about to ask about that. the service version query stuff. it's already doing the version querying but I planned to incorporate the feedback from belliott and refactor the Transport creation 17:17:12 melwitt: okay. I seem to recall agreeing with belliotts ideas 17:17:19 melwitt: because of the other requirements we have, querying the service version in the cell is just extra work, right 17:17:24 you're talking about for the rpc switching, right? 17:18:14 dansmith: what do you mean by extra work? 17:18:27 like an extra step? yes 17:18:55 melwitt: well, if we're going to require the cells to be upgraded first, then we'll always be okay to send the newest version known by the api stuff 17:19:02 this gets to the idea of doing an api upgrade last right? 17:19:09 ohh. I see 17:19:15 the same reason we don't really ever pin the conductor version, because it always has to be newer anyway 17:19:16 alaski: yeah 17:19:31 I left this feedback on that review a long time ago, but maybe it wasn't super clear at that point 17:19:34 so that's some documentation work we need to do 17:19:50 where is the current upgrade procedure documented? 17:19:51 well, and testing to make sure it works 17:19:56 yeah 17:20:06 alaski: not really sure we have a good place that covers it, TBH 17:20:23 okay 17:20:24 we don't, that was another todo in the etherpad from the midcycle 17:20:35 it was probably just me. I didn't get the point that the upgrade order obviates the patch 17:20:40 mriedem: for whom? 17:20:49 alaski: unspecified 17:20:56 mikal said we could open bugs against the docs team 17:21:11 cool 17:21:38 #action alaski to file a bug against the docs team on upgrade ordering with cellsv2, dependant on testing of that ordering 17:22:01 we really need to get testing of it done before we start prescribing, 17:22:14 and figure out how we're going to handle going from the current method to the new one 17:22:36 because until conductor is completely isolated from the api database, we can't really separate the api and the conductor I don't think 17:22:57 well, unless we're lucky right now and we use a voting test to make sure we don't migrate data away from where the api can see it until it's upgraded 17:23:01 like the aggregate stuff for example, 17:23:11 well, no that's manual 17:23:16 but the flavor thing we did in newton, 17:23:26 would break a mitaka api if you started running newton conductors with older apis 17:23:52 but maybe we get that in place for ocata early so we can make sure we don't break a newton api running with ocata conductor 17:23:58 this sounds like it's getting into O territory 17:24:00 that may have even been my todo item 17:24:00 yeah 17:24:06 or one of them 17:24:20 I tried a hack against grenade a month or so ago, but never got it working, for grenade reasons 17:24:28 and sdague refuses to help me on things, so... 17:24:55 don't get me started on that guy 17:25:02 that definitely sounds like him 17:25:36 well I think that's all on reviews right now 17:25:57 but yeah, I'll hold off on the docs bug until we get testing sorted 17:26:07 #topic Open Discussion 17:26:45 does anyone have a topic? 17:26:53 I do not have anything for here 17:27:21 so if we don't need the service version query, then I think all I have for rpc switching is to have the queries for mapping go in the compute rpcapi and refactor the Transport object stuff to be cached 17:27:52 and also switching needs to go in consoleauth rpcapi but IIRC that is intended to be removed 17:28:20 I recall paul murray mentioning that 17:28:30 yeah, that's what I'm thinking of 17:29:42 sounds good. that seems like a simplification of what's up now 17:29:56 anything else? 17:30:39 thanks everyone! 17:30:43 #endmeeting