17:00:10 #startmeeting nova notification 17:00:10 Meeting started Tue Mar 7 17:00:10 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gibi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:12 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:14 The meeting name has been set to 'nova_notification' 17:00:47 o/ 17:00:57 o/ 17:00:57 hi 17:00:58 o/ 17:02:28 let's get started 17:03:04 I thought I will go throught the status mail I posted on the ML 17:03:29 http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-March/113358.html 17:03:43 #topic bugs 17:04:06 https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1665263 17:04:06 Launchpad bug 1665263 in OpenStack Compute (nova) ocata "instance.delete notification is missing for unscheduled instance" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Balazs Gibizer (balazs-gibizer) 17:04:16 this is the only hight prio bug I know of 17:04:28 patch is ready for the cores 17:04:58 I will re-do the ocata backport after the patch merges to the master 17:05:29 https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1657428 17:05:29 Launchpad bug 1657428 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Nova sends notifications with different timestamp formats" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Timofey Durakov (tdurakov) 17:05:45 patch seems OK, ready for the cores. really simple patch 17:05:58 https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1653221 17:05:58 Launchpad bug 1653221 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "availability_zone field is missing from the service.update notification payload" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Balazs Gibizer (balazs-gibizer) 17:06:12 this is the last medium bug I know of 17:06:20 but this needs review from the subteam 17:06:50 any new bugs we need to track / discuss? 17:08:00 I guess this means no :) 17:08:05 i need to go through the delete one 17:08:16 i was originally worried about lots of duplicate code 17:08:33 yeah, I tried not to increase the duplications 17:08:50 the whole delete code path is quite complex 17:10:24 OK, let's move one 17:10:56 #topic versioned notification transformation 17:11:17 I proposed three patches to focus on this week 17:11:24 * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/384922 Transform instance.rebuild 17:11:27 notification 17:11:29 * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396621 Transform 17:11:32 instance.rebuild.error notification 17:11:34 * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/382959 Transform instance.reboot 17:11:37 notification 17:11:41 this mainly means inviting cores to look at those patches 17:11:48 and answer/fix comments from them 17:12:27 besides that we have couple commits that needs a re-spin to target the new Pike bp 17:12:49 https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/versioned-notification-transformation-ocata 17:13:08 any issues / questions about the transformation work? 17:13:58 those 3 look pretty standard 17:14:02 i'll try to take a look 17:14:16 mriedem: thanks. 17:15:31 OK, lets go to the next topic 17:15:41 #topic searchlight integration 17:16:02 there is a spec up from mriedem 17:16:10 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/441692/ 17:16:28 wow a ton of comments since yesterday 17:16:32 for me it seems we are on a right track with that 17:16:40 there are a lot of scary issues in that one 17:16:44 and hand waving 17:16:45 on my part 17:17:43 the scariest thing to me is that we need to keep in sync the API response the InstancePayload and the SL schema 17:18:38 anyhow I think we should start putting things together to see other issues we haven't discovered yet :) 17:19:18 for the notification subteam the most important thing is to get bp additional-notification-fields-for-searchlight merged 17:19:32 fortunetly the code is in good shape 17:19:38 I mean the easy part 17:19:43 excluding the BDM 17:20:18 easy part is here https://review.openstack.org/#/q/label:Code-Review%253E%253D1+status:open+branch:master+topic:bp/additional-notification-fields-for-searchlight 17:20:52 but I don't know how to get started modelling the BDM part of the bp 17:21:21 wouldn't the bdm payload just model the BlockDeviceMapping object? 17:21:50 it would be like network information in a notification 17:22:00 yes, good point 17:22:10 would actually be a list, but same idea 17:22:15 list of dicts 17:22:56 I will try to add something to the bp whiteboard this week 17:23:17 and ping the SL guys to see if they have somebody who can help implementing it 17:23:24 gibi, that helps. So that I can start working on BDM part 17:23:32 aunnam: thanks! 17:24:00 i think i saw Kevin_Zheng starting some patches for the SL integration 17:24:08 i need to call that searchlight because internally we call SL == softlayer :) 17:24:14 so i'm getting confused 17:24:56 ohh, good to know that, then I will try not to push the SL abbrev too much :) 17:25:40 I will definetly try to follow the searchlight integration patches to help with the notification part if and when needed 17:26:18 I expect to see bugs appearing about the notification code as soon as we start using it seriously 17:26:53 anything else about the searchlight integration? 17:28:02 well, 17:28:12 i'm also trying to get searchlight running in the nova-next ci job, 17:28:25 and testing some of that here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/441696/ 17:28:40 the hard part is going to be the fact that the searchlight devstack plugin doesn't configure anything except searchlight 17:28:49 i.e. it doesn't configure nova for the things that it needs to consume notifications 17:29:06 i think we could add some of that to the searchlight devstack plugin hopefully 17:29:17 otherwise we have to do stuff like this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/441711/ 17:29:30 summary is it's not looking as easy as i thought it would be 17:29:50 and i might need some help getting the pieces together to setup notifications going out of nova and being consumed by searchlight in the nova-next job 17:30:01 does searchlight even support/handle versioned notifications from nova> 17:30:01 ? 17:30:22 as far as I understand searchlight builds on the versioned notifications 17:30:44 but this understanding of mine is only based on bug reports and feature request 17:31:08 I guess I cannot avoid to look at the searchlight code sooner or later 17:32:44 yeah. i don't have anything else. will go through the spec comments today. 17:32:49 the event_types in https://github.com/openstack/searchlight/blob/2ff4edd1cb0f15742699ab153ed7b66d4fa45e75/searchlight/elasticsearch/plugins/nova/notification_handler.py seem to be legacy ones 17:32:50 and try to review some of the other changes. 17:32:57 right that's what i've noticed too 17:33:13 if searchlight doesn't support nova versioned notifications, 17:33:21 then we can't fulfill the rest api response for compute 17:33:24 and that's a pretty major blocker 17:34:22 correct, I think we need to ask the searchlight cores to give a statement about it 17:34:58 I will ask them tomorrow 17:35:14 OK, let's move on 17:35:21 #topic AOB 17:35:44 there is couple of small things 17:35:57 short circuit notification payload generation is the first 17:36:35 We merged a change yesterday in oslo.messaging to move the generic part of the idea from nova/cinder to oslo 17:37:11 so now we need to wait for an oslo.messaging release to bump the requirements and then adapt the nova patch 17:37:24 ok 17:37:36 meanwhile I still have to add some test coverage to the nova patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428260/ 17:37:41 you could request the o.m release yourself if you don't want to wait 17:37:52 just post a patch to the openstack/releases repo 17:37:55 and copy the oslo ptl 17:38:18 mriedem: thanks for the info, I will try to do that 17:39:25 the last thing from myself is asking for volunteers to pick up the implementation work for bp json-schema-for-versioned-notifications 17:39:42 it seems syjulian is busy with something else 17:40:16 for me this is low prio now considering all the other things we discussed already 17:40:23 not it 17:40:25 and i have to run 17:40:39 mriedem: thanks for beeing here 17:41:13 so that was the last thing from my side. Is there any other things that we need to discuss? 17:41:27 aunnam, sneti : anyting on your side? 17:41:32 gibi, nothing. 17:41:54 no from my side 17:41:59 patches are ready for review for the first part of search light fields. 17:42:12 gibi, so just waiting for reviews and comments. 17:42:47 sneti: yes, those patches are OK for me too 17:43:26 if nothing else then I think that was all for today 17:43:36 thanks for dropping by :) 17:43:59 #endmeeting