14:00:52 #startmeeting tricircle 14:00:52 Meeting started Wed Apr 19 14:00:52 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is joehuang. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:53 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:55 hello 14:00:55 The meeting name has been set to 'tricircle' 14:01:05 hi 14:01:09 #topic rollcall 14:01:09 hi 14:01:13 #info joehuang 14:01:19 #info Yipei 14:01:19 #info dongfeng 14:01:20 #info longxiongqiu 14:01:25 #info hejiawei 14:01:34 #info xiulin 14:01:55 #info zhiyuan 14:02:11 #topic feature implementation review 14:02:44 let's have a brief review on our feature implementation, please describe in short 14:03:10 hello 14:03:22 hi, ronghui 14:04:34 for me, 1) the async job api is still under test, when apply multiple filters it will fail. 2) doc for async job api also needs modification. 14:04:41 for lbaas, already complete the operation of creating lb 14:05:00 try creating a listener for lb 14:05:07 (1) flat network support is merged, but a patch need to be added to support the same physical network in different regions (2) multi-gateway support is updated to create local network/subnet before VM creation 14:06:39 to zhiyuan, for same physical network, I just find that we can simply catch the exception FlatNetworkInUse in central Neutron, and then do nothing, just let the local Neutron to judge again 14:07:43 ok, Dongfeng, functest is needed for API 14:08:17 the network of longqiu is not good and he have updated a very simple qos patch, after merged,i will update others patch one by one. 14:08:30 You can refer to pod functest, it's using restful request to do functest 14:08:40 ok, got it. 14:08:49 for me, spec for metering needs update. this week I'm not update it due to my math test. It will be update in this weekend. 14:09:23 ok 14:10:16 good 14:10:44 the milestone pike-1.5 will be on May.2 14:11:35 so if your feature plans to land in pike-1.5, please update in time, so that review can be done ASAP 14:11:45 to Joe, I am afraid that if the database record can be correctly restored. 14:12:50 though we can create both external networks, when query one of the network, the physical network field may be missing 14:12:54 FlatNetworkIn use only happen for physical network name duplication 14:14:10 need to dig into in more detail 14:15:13 For QoS spec 14:15:25 I am afraid that we can not associate one physical network with more than one network, we ignore the exception, at the same time the necessary database record is also missing 14:15:26 I found that there is misunderstanding on the comment 14:16:44 there is no existing async job to do QoS disassociation 14:18:22 @XiongQiu? 14:19:48 xiongqiu, are you online? 14:19:57 yes 14:20:32 do you mean dissassociation need no async. job 14:21:58 for network-qos disassociation, in sync way or async way? for port-qos disassociation, it'll be done in sync or async way? 14:22:04 i mean disassociation will be done by update network async job 14:22:14 I don't understand your comment 14:23:35 then how about port 14:23:40 Openstack qos API conference dont provide qos disassociation API,it is supported by network API 14:24:29 in update_network aync job https://github.com/openstack/tricircle/blob/master/tricircle/common/xrpcapi.py#L100 14:25:31 The implementation is in my new patch 14:25:48 ok, will review your patch 14:25:58 i have tested,it is successful 14:26:03 ok 14:26:17 for port, it'll be don in sync way or async way 14:26:42 I meant the port-qos disassociation 14:29:09 it is similar with network in Neutron source code , so it use async job as network 14:29:33 no port_update async job 14:30:01 i will add in new patch and test 14:30:37 and for port, it's clear where the pod is, so sync disassociation is enough 14:32:12 for async job, it's mainly for long run task, and make it more reliable 14:32:38 if sync operation is ok, it's better to use sync operation 14:32:42 If it use sync way,i just add some code in update port interface, i will consider the two ways 14:33:02 @zhiyuan, your idea? 14:34:03 and on the other hand, async job is to avoid deadlock 14:34:26 between local plugin and central plugin, if deadlock operation is possible 14:35:13 I think the above approach is fine, we just handle policy disassociation in network/port update. 14:36:10 just add a new part of code in network/port udpate to process policy disassociation 14:36:12 please have further investigation and verification offline 14:36:30 yes 14:37:02 #topic weekly meeting time 14:37:22 hello, OSIC event also brings impact in tricircle 14:37:47 some contributors from OSIC will have to work on other area 14:38:38 so we can reschedule the weekly meeting, it's inconvenient for us to have a meeting at current time 14:39:04 what's your proposal? 14:39:37 do you mean the intel developers will not review our patches? 14:40:25 they will reduce effort for they may have new job responsibility 14:41:37 it's a pity, more reviewers will accelerate the pace. I always expect there will be more comments. 14:41:50 for sure 14:42:44 for me 9:00 PM is ok 14:43:08 9:00 PM in Wednesday 14:43:13 it's ok to me 14:43:17 you mean restore to previous time slot 14:43:23 yes, 14:43:25 +1 14:43:29 +1 14:43:29 ok 14:43:44 +1 14:43:52 10:00 pm is a little late for us 14:43:56 +1 14:43:56 +1 14:43:58 +1 14:43:59 agree 14:44:49 the time is fine for me 14:44:52 OK, I'll create a new doodle, and send in the mail-list, please vote in the doodle 14:45:04 ok 14:45:12 #topic open discussion 14:45:24 any topic? 14:45:52 no for me 14:45:53 no for me 14:45:57 no 14:46:01 no 14:46:01 no 14:46:40 no 14:46:54 ok, thank you for attending the meeting 14:47:01 #endmeeting