16:00:10 <johnsom> #startmeeting Octavia
16:00:11 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jul  8 16:00:10 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is johnsom. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:13 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:15 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'octavia'
16:00:16 <johnsom> Hi everyone!
16:00:26 <gthiemonge> Hi!
16:00:32 <haleyb> hi
16:00:34 <cgoncalves> hi
16:00:36 <ataraday_> hi
16:00:45 <johnsom> I am having a slow start to the morning with irccloud down and chrome blowing up on me this morning.
16:01:12 <johnsom> Nothing like having four desktops worth of chrome windows all pile on the main desktop. lol
16:01:33 <johnsom> #topic Announcements
16:01:53 <johnsom> HAProxy 2.2 LTS released yesterday.
16:02:14 <johnsom> #link https://www.haproxy.com/blog/announcing-haproxy-2-2/
16:02:25 <johnsom> Those are the high level details.
16:02:57 <johnsom> Mostly bug fixes, performance stuff. There are some nice certificate update enhancements we could pull in once we have a path to 2.2
16:03:31 <johnsom> Just another reminder, the MS2 milestone is at the end of this month.
16:05:41 <johnsom> The summit program committee is looking for people to review summit presentations:
16:05:43 <johnsom> #link https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/programmingcommitteenom_summit2020
16:05:56 <rm_you> o/
16:06:05 <johnsom> It's nice that this is being announced this round, but I don't think I can do it this time.
16:06:25 <johnsom> Any other announcements this weekk?
16:06:27 <cgoncalves> Summit as in the Berlin Summit later this year?
16:06:45 <johnsom> As far as I am aware, yes
16:06:47 <johnsom> #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/2020/
16:06:56 <rm_you> I was pretty sure that wasn't gonna happen?
16:07:26 <rm_you> especially since the US is a shitshow right now with no signs of looking up until after early November <_<
16:07:47 <johnsom> I know they were talking about delaying it, but that was a while ago. I haven't heard anything new.
16:08:05 <johnsom> Yeah, I think travel is going to be an issue
16:08:29 <johnsom> Probably not for cgoncalves though.... lol
16:08:58 <cgoncalves> it would still a 5h30 journey :)
16:10:03 <johnsom> Ok, anything else?
16:10:23 <johnsom> #topic Brief progress reports / bugs needing review
16:11:24 <ataraday_> I created a section with some fixes for amphorav2 in https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/octavia-priority-reviews
16:11:59 <johnsom> Reviews, various little bug fixes, and progress on failover for amphorav2. The tasks should all be converted now, I just need to work on the flows.
16:12:16 <johnsom> Got the first green test run last night (though stuff is still broken)
16:12:54 <johnsom> Ah, yeah, that has been on my todo list. I need to update the priority review list for Victoria. Thanks for the start!
16:13:07 <cgoncalves> I proposed backport of the failover refactor to ussuri and train. ussuri is ready, train fixing py2 issues.  worked on a path in the amphorav2 provider to not use jobboard and so not require extra infrastructure like redis/zookeeper and additional mysql database
16:14:28 <johnsom> Someone almost deleted the priority review list... (there is a history so it can be recovered)
16:14:43 <gthiemonge> I proposed patches for SCTP support in the Amphora
16:14:51 <gthiemonge> johnsom: ahem
16:14:54 <johnsom> Yeah, cool
16:15:56 <cgoncalves> I have a handful of patches to add to the priority review list...
16:16:38 <johnsom> Please do. I will try to go through it sometime this week.
16:17:08 <cgoncalves> ataraday_, thanks for reviewing https://review.opendev.org/#/c/739053/. be assured we want jobboard enabled by default
16:18:57 <rm_you> We are working on refactoring the statistics collection driver layer -- per johnsom's comments on the patch, it looks like we're going to have to do a ton more work, and actually move it up a level, outside of the amphora driver and as a top level interface (since it will be usable be all providers, not just amphora -- and already is being used that way actually)
16:19:39 <johnsom> Yeah, I just want to make sure we include/consider the non-amphora drivers in that effort.
16:21:57 <cgoncalves> rm_you, it came to my attention you -2 Backport-Candidate the failover refactor patch. why do you think it is not backport material?
16:22:31 <johnsom> Oh, I also found the issue with our IPv6 only gate job, so that is back to passing once the patch merges.
16:22:33 <rm_you> it's a complete rewrite of our failover flows and is a major and very complex change
16:22:37 <cgoncalves> the commit title may be misleading but it fixes a ton of issues we've been seeing people getting into due to nova issues
16:22:42 <rm_you> I in no way would have expected it to be backport material
16:22:50 <rm_you> which is why i said i was surprised to see you backporting it
16:23:20 <johnsom> I went to some lengths to make sure there are no "non-backportable" changes, but it is a large change.
16:23:26 <rm_you> I'm not ... strictly opposed to VERY careful work backporting it....
16:23:32 <rm_you> but GREAT CARE must be taken
16:23:48 <johnsom> That said, it does fix some nasty issues we have seen people run into. Most notably the nova bugs
16:23:55 <rm_you> I am hesitant to actually merge a change of that magnitude in such a critical path, as a backport
16:23:57 <cgoncalves> yeah, for sure it's a massive patch
16:24:36 <rm_you> and we definitely haven't had much time-testing on this yet
16:24:58 <rm_you> I am ... *relatively* confident it works, but ...
16:25:01 <cgoncalves> we've lately seen outages in different clouds due to these nova bugs, causing us to spend time go fix it manually
16:25:16 <johnsom> For personal reasons, I would really like to see it make it to train
16:25:45 <rm_you> I understand it's a balance between trying not to backport things that could upset the stability of *stable* releases, and also fixing things in stable releases that aren't so "stable:
16:25:47 <rm_you> "
16:26:14 <johnsom> yep
16:26:25 <johnsom> #topic Open Discussion
16:26:39 <rm_you> so if you are willing to take the responsibility for making sure it's all working... and you are VERY confident that it's going to be an improvement and not cause any other issues... I won't stand in your way
16:26:53 <rm_you> I would much rather encourage people to UPGRADE to get it
16:27:08 <rm_you> rather than backport it into existing people's deployments as a minor version increment
16:28:11 <johnsom> What do others think?
16:28:46 <cgoncalves> it's not that trivial to upgrade on commercial offerings :)
16:28:54 <rm_you> heh
16:29:05 <rm_you> can't just change the VERSION flag to "master"? :D
16:29:09 <cgoncalves> it is also not even yet released in victoria
16:29:41 <rm_you> I thought it actually merged in time for our ussuri release?
16:29:49 <rm_you> did it not
16:29:50 <ataraday_> I'm for backporting this as it not to get customer upgraded to latest version
16:29:53 <cgoncalves> I proposed the backport to ussuri so...
16:29:54 <rm_you> did I very much lose track of time
16:30:01 <rm_you> I've been running it since mid-ussuri lol
16:30:21 <johnsom> No, it sat and didn't get into Ussuri
16:30:25 <rm_you> :(
16:30:25 <ataraday_> *not so easy
16:30:32 <rm_you> alright
16:30:36 <rm_you> ya'll go for it :D
16:30:41 <rm_you> I wish you the best of luck
16:31:15 <rm_you> and i suppose I can slap a +A on there if you've very confident in it, though my ability to test on older versions is limited
16:31:17 <cgoncalves> rm_you, the fact you run it in production gives us an extra boost of convidence that it is stable and worth backporting :)
16:31:33 <johnsom> Let's move forward with the backports, but maybe put extra testing cycles into those patches
16:31:38 <cgoncalves> *confidence
16:31:39 <rm_you> yes, I imagine my environment is like 95% of the testing it has so far, lol
16:31:54 <rm_you> *real world testing, at least
16:31:59 <rm_you> possibly 100% <_<
16:32:59 <cgoncalves> ataraday_, you're also supportive of the backport? cool, that makes at least 2 vendors interested
16:34:54 <cgoncalves> rm_you, FWIW I'm not going to propose backports to stein or older releases
16:35:11 <johnsom> We should all commit to doing some extra testing on the backports.
16:35:43 <ataraday_> cgoncalves, yep, I'm for backports
16:35:51 <rm_you> i'll test the frontports ;)
16:36:30 <cgoncalves> I reviewed the master patch line-by-line and proposed the backports. internally we will be testing this on Python 2 and 3 and on Queens and Train clouds
16:36:37 <cgoncalves> rm_you, lol
16:37:12 <johnsom> Ok, any other topics for today?  Good discussion, it's an important patch.
16:37:45 <cgoncalves> thank you for all your hard work on the patch, johnsom!
16:38:18 <johnsom> That was a doozy, thanks!
16:39:00 <cgoncalves> the single haproxy patch was also something :) and it was backported!
16:39:15 <johnsom> True
16:41:06 <johnsom> I don't think I have any other topics today.
16:41:51 <johnsom> There was a discussion this morning that the barbican ACL call may need to be updated for some of these alternate keystone token types. I expect similar to what we did with the neutron subnet call.
16:42:04 <johnsom> If someone has some cycles there should be a story open for it
16:43:38 <johnsom> Ok, if there aren't any more topics I will call the meeting for the week.
16:43:46 <johnsom> Thank you all for your work!
16:44:13 <cgoncalves> thanks!
16:44:27 <rm_you> o/
16:44:37 <johnsom> #endmeeting