16:00:50 #startmeeting Octavia 16:00:50 Meeting started Wed Jun 16 16:00:50 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gthiemonge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:50 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:50 The meeting name has been set to 'octavia' 16:00:57 Hi 16:01:07 o/ 16:01:17 hi 16:01:42 #topic Announcements 16:01:56 functional tests are broken on octavia master - related to sqlachemy 1.4? 16:02:06 #link https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/76fb5298a6b54152bc67722a10e18a23 16:02:14 o/ 16:02:19 Hmm maybe 16:02:36 I'm going to take a look after the meeting, unless someone has an idea 16:02:42 I put up a patch that I think is also related, with duplicate member creation error handling 16:03:07 "Deferred loader for attribute 'pool_id' failed to populate correctly" lol 16:03:29 Where's zzzeek lol 16:03:44 there are a bunch of other errors in the same job 16:03:57 TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'ImmutableColumnCollection' and 'list' 16:04:45 Database health check failed due to: boom.: Exception: boom 16:04:50 that's a nice exception 16:05:07 Thanks 16:05:11 XD 16:05:22 Yeah that one was probably typed into the test data 16:05:36 Mocked exception ;) 16:05:40 I used that for an expected failur 16:05:52 ^^ yeah in a bunch of places 16:06:13 * johnsom is in a parallel meeting, so slightly distracted 16:07:14 next announcement/topic is: 16:07:23 lower-constraints jobs are broken on python-octaviaclient stable branches (<=victoria) 16:07:27 another one! 16:07:32 #link https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/a2ae26e5c9e9442caa04ac5e1addeccd 16:08:02 There are at least 3 stable branches affected: 16:08:12 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack%252Fpython-octaviaclient+status:open 16:09:19 and I can see other errors on train 16:09:21 were we going to drop those jobs from stable branches? i think other components did 16:10:01 oh, we did in octavia too 16:10:01 Yeah we can drop the lower-constraints job on stable branches, I think we already did it in the past for similar reason 16:10:05 No. we decided not to as our tests, unlike some other projects, actually test lower constraints 16:10:25 Yeah, I think we agreed that stable could go 16:11:28 ok 16:11:43 I'll take a look at those patches as well 16:11:59 johnsom: so was that a yes or a no? 16:12:09 yes for stable-branches, no for master branch 16:12:12 AFAIU 16:12:23 Yes for stable. No we are not going to remove it for the main branch 16:12:28 Right 16:12:33 rm_work: Yes, that was our agreement from a previous meeting 16:12:43 then we're all agreed! again! :D 16:13:09 agreed, can do like we did for octavia repo then 16:13:14 yep 16:13:18 great! 16:13:41 any other announcements? 16:14:50 ok 16:15:02 #topic Brief progress reports / bugs needing review 16:15:48 not such much upstream work for this week, I've been focusing on downstream tasks. 16:16:06 but I proposed a commit to disable conntrack for TCP connections in the amphora 16:16:31 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/796608 16:16:46 Yeah, all I have is the client patch for large cloud improvements and the associated backports 16:17:02 conntrack is always enabled in Octavia but we should use it only for LVS-based listeners (UDP/SCTP) 16:17:13 +1 to that 16:17:39 Wish we could just remove that kernel module again, but at least we can bypass it for non-UDP based traffic 16:17:39 I heard people complaining about the kernel messages that are logged when the conntrack table is full, and then an haproxy with a high maxconn was killed by the oom-killer. 16:18:20 bleh :/ 16:18:35 oh, so probably (maybe?) related to SQLAlchemy upgrade: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/795637 16:18:46 i should update the title to mention it's also for listeners, pre-emptively 16:22:17 #topic Open Discussion 16:22:25 Any other topics today? 16:22:42 can we decide on an irc channel? :-p 16:22:45 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/793999 16:22:53 johnsom: rm_work: should we propose a pytohn-octaviaclient release for Xena? 16:23:04 that way i can update the contributor doc 16:23:06 haleyb: yeah sorry I was a bit lazy on that one 16:23:22 Yes, if it's not broken. grin 16:23:27 I'll fix the commit and re-propose it 16:23:34 johnsom: master is broken? 16:23:49 johnsom: I'll check what you did :D 16:23:49 I don't know 16:24:14 Adam Harwell proposed openstack/octavia master: Make duplicate constraint checks more generic https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/795637 16:25:29 so the next meeting will probably be held in openstack-octavia 16:25:36 I wish we could do channel redirects... ... can we do that? 16:25:45 if my commit passes the CI :D 16:25:48 I still don't particularly like switching the channel name 16:26:03 rm_work: I don't think OFTC supports it 16:26:22 Right, I don't think OFTC supports it 16:26:27 i think it's 50/50, maybe some people are looking for the "openstack-octavia" channel and can't find it? but I think once we switch it's just going to be some people failing to find the lbaas channel <_< 16:26:53 we will be in the lbaas channel, redirecting people to octavia ;-) 16:26:54 should i flip a coin? 16:27:10 my followup for that is, if it's a coin flip, why bother changing 16:27:37 we have like 8 years of people knowing where this channel is :D 16:27:46 and docs showing it is here, etc 16:27:49 ok, thumb war then 16:27:57 lol 16:28:35 Yeah you have a point here 16:28:38 i mean whatever, if you're set on changing the name, i guess that's fine... it just seems pointless to me 16:29:15 go sit in #openstack-octavia and set the topic to "head over to #openstack-lbaas" 16:29:23 ;) 16:29:46 We can easily make openstack-octavia disappear as well. 16:29:55 i proposed it just as we were moving, pendulum never swung far enough i guess 16:30:37 i mean there's two ways to look at that -- we're moving, so lets rip the bandaid and do all the change at once; or: we're already doing one change, lets upset things as little as possible 16:30:52 but wasting too much time discussing this is just bikeshedding :D 16:31:26 I'm +0 16:31:35 so if the change is merging, i'll see you over there :P 16:31:53 ok, I'll abandon the change, we will stay on #openstack-lbaas 16:32:04 change is still WIP-1 and 2xCR-1 16:32:15 so that would be extra work for me 16:32:19 ok, i'll update by contrib doc patch then to point to OFTC 16:32:33 haleyb: thanks, rm_work will review that change 16:32:38 I will :P 16:32:47 ping me! 16:33:42 oh, and while we're on the simple patch wagon, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-octaviaclient/+/795902 fits the bill 16:34:36 haleyb: I'll review it thanks 16:34:55 Ok guys, anything else? 16:36:37 Ok thank you! 16:36:43 #endmeeting