17:00:26 #startmeeting qa 17:00:31 Meeting started Thu May 12 17:00:26 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mtreinish. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:32 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:34 The meeting name has been set to 'qa' 17:00:43 o/ 17:00:45 hi, who's here today? 17:00:51 < 17:00:51 o/ 17:00:53 hi 17:01:36 o/ 17:01:53 o/ 17:02:06 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Agenda_for_May_12th_2016_.281700_UTC.29 17:02:10 ^^^ today's agenda 17:02:43 o/ 17:02:47 ok, let's get started 17:02:49 o/ 17:02:55 #topic Specs Reviews 17:03:04 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/qa-specs,n,z 17:03:22 so there are a couple of specs reviews open that look to be in a state they can merge 17:03:31 does anyone want to discuss an open spec review? 17:04:00 rlrossit: ??? 17:04:02 mtreinish: I have some questions as to what I should do with my spec. Where should it live? 17:04:10 like it's not really tempest 17:04:30 I guess the spec is even more of just a general initiative kinda thing 17:04:33 rlrossit: oh, about the dir structure, yeah I guess we don't really have a place for other projects 17:04:52 rlrossit: we probably should add another dir (or just pick up things in the root dir) 17:05:04 rlrossit: I'll push a patch to reorganize things and rebase your's on top of it 17:05:12 I would also like to see what interest there is around testing permissions/policies in folks' clouds 17:05:24 the last time this came up I think we just jammed it in devstack, which wasn't really correct 17:05:38 I'm thinking it might be a little more relevant now that https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290155/5/specs/newton/approved/policy-in-code.rst exists 17:05:57 #link https://review.openstack.org/314704 17:06:05 ^ that's what we're discussing 17:06:20 oh right, the link. Thanks mtreinish ;) 17:07:00 rlrossit: well, I think that helps make the weird stuff you're doing in your cloud more clear 17:07:17 but crazy policy decisions have existed before that spec :) 17:08:09 rlrossit: is there anything else on your spec? 17:08:33 mtreinish: not really. Other than, have you seen any other role-based testing roll around openstack? 17:09:04 something only slightly relevant is policies in keystone 17:09:10 I got inspiration from some really strict cloud cafe tests, but I haven't seen anything other than that (and even then, it was only barbican) 17:09:34 rlrossit: nothing like what you're trying to do. It's come up in bugs every now and then, but most of the upstream testing has implicity assumes a default (more or less) policy file 17:09:57 the type of token needed to access resources in the keystone admin api changes depending on the policy in use 17:10:11 mtreinish: alright. I don't expect my project to be the final implementation, it was more of just a proof-of-concept kinda thing to say "hey, here's another thing to test" 17:11:19 I'm trying to address some of it in tempest but it's something different from your spec really 17:11:42 It would be nice if policy testing wasn't mixed in with other capabilities, especially since there's going to be a lag in transitioning from policy file to more card coded 17:12:16 hogepodge: what do you mean by other capabilities? 17:12:21 hogepodge: well rlrossit's spec/project implements it all as a standalone tempest plugin 17:12:50 ah, I see 17:12:52 great 17:13:15 hogepodge: and my work addresses identity admin API, which should be out of scope for defcore, rigth? 17:13:34 andreaf: it would be, yes 17:13:40 ok, the other spec I wanted to bring up was: 17:13:42 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/269934/ 17:13:56 which is for the tempest run work, it'd be good to get review cycles on that 17:14:06 because I'd like to start to get that moving for real soon 17:15:42 mtreinish: I can review that this week 17:15:47 andreaf: ok, cool 17:15:50 thanks 17:16:08 does anyone have anything else on specs? 17:17:23 ok, let's move on 17:17:30 #topic Tempest 17:18:08 it looks like oomichi put all the Newton priority items on the agenda under this topic 17:18:17 but I don't expect to talk about each one 17:18:26 so does anyone have anything they'd like to bring up on tempest? 17:18:32 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/283770 17:18:32 yes 17:18:36 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/315319/ 17:18:38 Still looking for reviews on centralized workspaces 17:18:55 same - reviews requested 17:18:58 please 17:19:00 slowrie: ok, I'll take a look 17:19:18 fnaval: I think that's a duplicate of another open patch 17:19:29 mtreinish: I also need for someone else to look @ subunit-describe-calls, already has a +2 from oomichi 17:19:30 yes, so how should we approach that 17:19:32 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/312275 17:20:14 fnaval: well normally the patch which was pushed first is the we work with 17:20:42 slowrie: ok, not really a tempest thing, but I'll take a look. (the os-testr core team is a bit smaller) 17:20:50 I didn't really check, but what is the status for running plugins in the tempest venv on the CI? 17:20:50 fnaval, mtreinish: I can look at the catalog one, if you find a duplicate let me know 17:20:51 mtreinish: kk, i'll either put a depedency on my patch on that one or just be a co-author of the original 17:20:53 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284273 17:21:02 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284273 17:21:23 andreaf: ^^^ that's the other patch 17:21:29 andreaf: awesome, thanks - I'll ping you when I make the changes 17:21:32 tosky2: that's landed on the devstack side 17:21:39 fnaval: ok 17:21:39 so you should be able to use it 17:22:11 oh, good to hear - is it already used by some plugin? 17:22:17 tosky2: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+project:openstack-dev/devstack++topic:install-plugins 17:22:27 thanks 17:22:53 on your project config side you should just need to use the devstack passthrough to set TEMPEST_PLUGIN to the things you want to pip install 17:23:23 tosky2: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/299888/ is a WIP for doing that with ironic 17:23:33 (it still has complications because it's an intree plugin) 17:24:19 ok, does anyone have anything else to discuss on tempest? 17:26:00 we're working on the prio items, but nothing to discuss here from my side 17:26:26 andreaf: ok 17:26:46 ok, lets move on then 17:26:55 #topic DevStack + Grenade 17:27:12 so there is some big news on this one, but I'll give sc68cal first crack at it 17:27:26 sc68cal: around? 17:28:01 around 17:28:38 So - we landed the new lib/neutron yesterday, but it's still got a few things to fix that I made mistakes on 17:29:00 sc68cal: you're supposed to gloss over mistakes :) 17:29:01 yay!! \o/ 17:29:35 mtreinish: they're features not mistakes 17:29:43 mtreinish: heh. Well, I want to make sure I keep everyone's expectations in check 17:29:47 sc68cal: is it in use if you enable neutron or has that switch not been made yet? 17:30:35 clarkb: the switch hasn't been made yet, I have a patch up that makes the switch and tests neutron, we have some failures I need to track down. It's mostly just making sure I configure the *bare minimum* for everything to function 17:32:03 o/ very late 17:32:22 sc68cal: is there a deprecation plan for neutron-legacy, like are we just gonna make a hard cut 17:32:23 so, I'll keep plugging away at it, and once it's more presentable I'll put something on the ML on how to use, although the commit message for it does cover how to use it 17:32:36 or do a real deprecation period (with a warning being emitted) first 17:33:15 mtreinish: I think once we switch over the neutron CI jobs to lib/neutron - we can probably do a hard cut 17:33:27 sc68cal: ok, cool 17:33:27 since that'll be the hardest part 17:33:42 but putting in a deprecation warning in advance sounds good to me 17:35:06 ok, is there anything else to discuss on devstack and grenade this week? 17:35:12 oh, rfolco you put something on the agenda 17:35:47 mtreinish, oops got disconnected at the right time :) 17:36:14 heh 17:36:19 mtreinish, I�d like to hear thoughts about enabling mariadb for devstack on ubuntu. 17:36:19 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/314087/ 17:36:42 The original proposal was to allow users choosing between mysql flavors (MySQL/MariaDB) on Ubuntu. 17:36:53 rfolco: hmm, so in the past we haven't really made an opinion on it, we just use the distro default 17:37:10 which is maria on fedora and mysql on ubuntu 17:37:44 personally I'm leaning towards doing something like enabling maria on ubuntu as a devstack plugin 17:37:52 and leave the default path to just be the distro default 17:38:07 ++ 17:38:43 looks good, ubuntu must have a reason for keeping mysql as default 17:39:33 ok mtreinish would propose something as a plugin instead 17:40:00 rfolco: that I can't tell you. Although my internal conspiracy theorist wants to say there is a secret cabal with oracle and canonical 17:40:18 rfolco: ok, cool 17:40:25 or simply because debian did not switch yet... 17:40:27 is there anything else to discuss on devstack or grenade? 17:40:49 right! mariadb is the community fork for mysql :) 17:41:36 ok, let's move on 17:41:52 #topic Openstack-Health 17:42:11 so just quickly on this I wanted to discuss: 17:42:13 #link https://review.openstack.org/311919 17:42:31 which is for enabling elastic-recheck support to openstack-health 17:42:49 mtreinish: were you able to solve the initial performance issues you were having? 17:42:54 right now the biggest blocker on it is the performance of the actually elasticsearch querying 17:43:19 slowrie: sort of, I got the combined api query down to ~20 sec by hitting es in parallel 17:43:37 I haven't had a chance to do more indepth profiling of where it's spending the time yet 17:43:46 would this be a case for something we would run server side at specific times to try to just cache known bugs? 17:44:11 so making it update periodically was probably gonna be my next step 17:44:22 because this doesn't have to be real time 17:44:44 we already have caching enabled for that rest api call in the js 17:44:57 but I'm thinking it'll need to be more explicit 17:45:10 the problem is we don't have any manual caching mechanisms in place yet 17:45:22 I'll take a look when I get my next block of free time 17:45:36 ok, cool thanks 17:45:49 does anyone have anything else they'd like to discuss on openstack-health? 17:45:57 On another note, I have managed to get subunit2sql working with json fields 17:46:10 Currently building database size to do some proper benchmarking 17:46:17 it's a useful dashboard 17:46:24 slowrie: oh cool, I'm curious to see how that performs 17:46:34 mtreinish: On a small scale it's not noticable yet 17:46:36 slowrie: to store metadata? 17:46:38 Yeah 17:46:59 andreaf: it completely removes any kvp metadata tables and just stores them natively 17:47:05 nice, looking forward to results as well :) 17:47:07 Current issues that are definite blockers though 17:47:11 it'll get tricky enabling that in a generic way (considering the backend requirements) but it should be doable 17:47:16 It requires sqlalchemy 1.1 which is still dev 17:47:26 and it requires either a change to postgre or mysql 5.7 17:47:33 oh ok 17:47:55 slowrie: right, that's the tricky bit because we have to handle the case where that isn't what's being used 17:48:06 like sqlite... 17:48:22 but it's something we can work on when the time is right 17:48:24 mtreinish: yeah, currently on my dev box it's just using an alembic revision only for mysql 17:49:01 ok, is there anything else on this topic? 17:49:47 mtreinish: we talked at the beginning of o-h or before that about tracking changes in the amount of tests executed 17:50:09 mtreinish: is this something that you think it would be interesting still to highlight on the dashboard 17:50:10 ? 17:50:21 andreaf: it already does that to some extent on the per job page 17:50:28 it shows raw test counts for everything there 17:50:43 we probably can refine it a bit or add a view to show tests per run 17:50:54 but I think that's fine to work on 17:51:57 ok, lets move on 17:52:05 #topic Critical Reviews 17:52:17 does anyone have any reviews they'd like to get extra eyes on? 17:52:36 I've got a couple: 17:52:38 #link https://review.openstack.org/314673 17:52:46 #link https://review.openstack.org/314775 17:54:12 no one else has any reviews to bring up? 17:54:14 mtreinish: ok added to my list 17:54:27 andreaf: thanks 17:54:36 they both are super straightforward 17:54:44 mtreinish: I would like opinions on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/313171/ 17:54:56 mtreinish: the scope thing in auth.py 17:55:09 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/313171/ 17:55:31 I could swear I've reviewed that several times already :) 17:56:35 andreaf: I'll take another look, but I seem to remember it being close and mostly being +2 when it was back tempest-lib 17:57:00 heh I changed it a bit based on jordanP input, made it simpler I think 17:57:18 ok, cool 17:58:01 ok, if there aren't any other reviews let's open the floor for 2 min 17:58:02 the thing is when I use domain scoped tokens it doesn't work on liberty - only mitaka and newton, so I think I'll have to add a config option 17:58:06 #topic Open Discussion 17:58:23 andreaf: why, that should be something that works fine on liberty too 17:58:30 not that we ever really test it 17:58:47 andreaf: we should circle back with jamielennox or someone after the meeting 17:59:59 after some more research it does look like there's a json1 extension for sqlite & mariadb supports json fields as of 10.0.1 17:59:59 ok, well we're basically at time, so let's end here 18:00:03 thanks everyone 18:00:09 #endmeeting