18:01:25 <peterstac> #startmeeting Trove
18:01:26 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Nov  4 18:01:25 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is peterstac. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:01:27 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:01:29 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'trove'
18:01:49 <peterstac> Waiting for folks to trickle in ...
18:03:01 <peterstac> (cp16net has an appointment and SlickNik and amrith are unavailable, so I'll be chairing)
18:04:23 <dougshelley66> o/
18:04:55 <peterstac> This could be a small meeting ... I think people forgot about the time change ;)
18:05:06 <dougshelley66> ok peterstac let's vote on some stuff
18:05:34 <peterstac> sure, how about who picks up the bar tab at mid-cycle?
18:05:45 <dougshelley66> i move that the next sponsor for mid-cycle provides beer all day during the meetings
18:06:37 <peterstac> Well, I guess we'll move on - people can catch up as they join
18:06:48 <peterstac> #topic Trove pulse update
18:07:10 <peterstac> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/trove-pulse-update
18:07:33 <peterstac> cp16net updated the stats, thx!
18:07:56 <peterstac> Not surprising, stats fell for the week due to the summit
18:08:26 <peterstac> Hopefully they'll pick up again this week
18:08:57 <dougshelley66> it would be good to get old reviews dropped from the queue
18:09:06 <dougshelley66> but i guess the submitters would have to abandon them
18:10:01 <peterstac> I'm still in favor of having a bot do that ... nobody can get mad at a bot :P
18:10:55 <dougshelley66> i assume that having a bot do that is still out of favour with the community?
18:11:33 <peterstac> That was my take, but maybe we can ask some other projects how they handle this
18:11:49 <peterstac> Ok, moving on
18:11:59 <peterstac> #topic Gate Jobs failing
18:12:47 <peterstac> We've noticed that the gate jobs are failing (apparently in stable branch as well)
18:13:03 <peterstac> They're getting a segmentation violation ...
18:13:21 <peterstac> amrith and cp16net (I believe) were looking into it ...
18:13:55 <peterstac> I don't know if they've made any progress
18:14:35 <peterstac> I've ran some tests myself, trying to pin down whether it's a pip versioning issue
18:14:42 <peterstac> No smoking gun yet
18:15:10 <dougshelley66> smoking guns aren't allowed in canada
18:15:24 <dougshelley66> we have a new Prime Minister who isn't a gun freak like the last one
18:17:19 <_imandhan_> I've been here o///
18:17:29 <peterstac> Ok, I guess we'll get an update once amrith and cp16net are back online
18:17:53 <peterstac> #topic Open Discussion
18:17:55 <dougshelley66> well we are kind of stuck until we can get the gate fixed
18:18:05 <dougshelley66> so that should be a priority for anyone that has some cycles to figure it out
18:18:13 <_imandhan_> are all the patches in merge conflict due to the manager refactor part 1 that were merged?
18:18:19 <peterstac> Yeah, I'll keep looking into it - but the fact that it affects stable branch is disconcerting
18:18:19 <mvandijk_> did anyone see that i posted a blueprint for moving to oslo.db ?
18:19:35 <peterstac> mvandijk_, have you submitted a spec?  Most people don't follow bp's explicitly
18:19:59 <mvandijk_> Not yet. Working on scoping the work then I'll put one up.
18:20:37 <peterstac> Do you want to talk about it?  ;)
18:20:54 <dougshelley66> _imandhan_ yes the merge conflict is likely due to manager refactor
18:21:55 <mvandijk_> peterstac, just wait for the spec then we can discuss it
18:22:06 <peterstac> _imandhan_, I've seen gerrit claim a merge conflict but then not get one when doing the actual merge, so it could be very easy
18:22:14 <peterstac> mvandijk_, sounds good
18:22:25 <cp16net> howdy yall
18:22:45 <peterstac> hey cp16net, that was quick
18:23:07 <peterstac> maybe you can give us an update on the gate issues (if you have one)?
18:23:09 <cp16net> it was faster than i expected
18:23:35 <cp16net> my only update on the gate is that its broken giving a seg fault on unit tests
18:23:46 <cp16net> and i've seen other random failures here and there as well
18:24:01 <cp16net> only thing i've seen consistent was the seg fault
18:24:08 <peterstac> have you looked at stable branch?  (i.e. is it the same issue?)
18:24:22 <cp16net> not looked at stable yet
18:24:38 <cp16net> i'm focused on master first
18:24:55 <cp16net> because we have a larger queue of patches there that need to pass
18:25:20 <cp16net> i dunno if its the same issue or not
18:25:23 <peterstac> I was just trying to guess what could cause the issue there, since don't they peg the pip versions pretty tight?
18:26:09 <cp16net> yeah so i went through and found the diff between a successful run and the last bad run i saw from pip freeze and got a small diff
18:26:14 <cp16net> let me see if i can find it....
18:26:15 <peterstac> I also took a look as some other projects to see if they were having issues, and it doesn't seem so
18:26:37 <cp16net> #link http://paste.openstack.org/show/477928/
18:26:42 <cp16net> theres the small diff i found
18:26:48 <ashleighfarnham> .
18:27:29 <cp16net> something makes me think WebTest but then i'm not sure because its unit tests that are failing
18:27:51 <dougshelley66> so with "goodpip" py27 works?
18:27:57 <cp16net> yes
18:28:15 <dougshelley66> so can't we just change one requirement at a time and find which one breaks it
18:28:18 <cp16net> it should have a few older versions
18:28:18 <peterstac> I ran a test with the 'good' pip, but knocked out some I didn't think were culpable
18:28:22 <peterstac> and it still failed
18:28:34 <peterstac> one of them was redis - maybe that's causing the issue?
18:28:44 <cp16net> yeah i'm starting to wonder if its something else
18:29:09 <cp16net> if i saw some strange oslo changes i would think that would be the issue
18:29:14 <cp16net> but thats not the case that i see
18:30:53 <peterstac> I'll start a test just pegging redis to the good version - see if that passes
18:31:10 <cp16net> peterstac: sounds good
18:31:22 <cp16net> we need to get this resolved soon
18:31:27 <peterstac> Otherwise we may need to do what dougshelley66 suggested - try each one separately
18:32:08 <cp16net> yeah if anyone else has a good theory on this it would be appreciated
18:32:17 <cp16net> or if you know of other projects that ran into the same issue
18:32:38 <cp16net> i'll continue working on this and looking around
18:33:09 <peterstac> ok, any other items to discuss?
18:34:01 <cp16net> one other thing i'd like to mention is the releases are changing a bit and allowing projects to be a little more free when they make their release
18:34:13 <cp16net> like we talked about at the summit last week
18:34:46 <dougshelley66> cp16net i must have missed that - can you provide an overview
18:34:49 <peterstac> cp16net, you also mentioned possibly doing some kind of summit overview
18:34:56 <peterstac> should we start with that?
18:35:09 <_imandhan_> that would be nice :)
18:35:31 <cp16net> so there was an email from doug tagged with [release]
18:35:37 <cp16net> there were a few acrtually
18:36:08 <cp16net> but the main thing i took away from the emails was that there would be a move away from managing releases from launchpad
18:36:39 <dougshelley66> ah ok - i guess i need to catch up on my ML reading
18:36:43 <cp16net> since i'm fairly new to keeping up with the releases i'm not sure what this exactly means yet but i'll have more info moving forward
18:37:13 <peterstac> ok, great
18:37:15 <cp16net> i'm working on getting a new trove client version 1.4.0
18:37:34 <cp16net> this will include the cluster create with AZ and network
18:37:46 <cp16net> and a few other minor changes
18:38:18 <cp16net> this will help users with the latest liberty release of trove
18:38:29 <peterstac> cp16net, let me know when you do that and I'll generate new CLI docs
18:38:43 <cp16net> k
18:39:26 <peterstac> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-trove-summit
18:39:32 <cp16net> thats all i had on the release stuff
18:39:37 <cp16net> so the overview of the summit talks
18:39:41 <peterstac> There's a link to the main summit etherpad
18:40:14 <peterstac> Actually, this one is probably better:
18:40:17 <peterstac> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Design_Summit/Mitaka/Etherpads#Trove
18:40:35 <cp16net> so we talked about adding support for other backends for backups
18:40:57 <cp16net> we specifically focused on looking into supporting ceph
18:41:26 <cp16net> this didnt seem to be very controversial
18:41:48 <cp16net> more discussion was about how and if it would allow us to tie in for backups
18:41:59 <cp16net> or snapshotting the volumes
18:42:00 <_imandhan_> is this something we will be implementing during mitaka or down the lane?
18:42:45 <cp16net> i think its something that should be worked on during mitaka
18:42:53 <cp16net> although i'm not sure who will be working on it
18:42:57 <peterstac> _imandhan_, well, nobody committed to doing the work yet ...
18:43:12 <_imandhan_> hmm okay
18:43:16 <cp16net> yeah no one was assigned and no bp that i've seen yet
18:43:40 <cp16net> then managing upgrades was another topuic
18:44:03 <dougshelley66> yes - that is something that has been kicked around for a while
18:44:35 <cp16net> we talked about adding a way to add a key for accesss
18:44:50 <cp16net> but this turns out to not be a good idea for security reasons
18:45:00 <peterstac> until we realized the big security hole it created ;D
18:45:05 <cp16net> yup
18:45:25 <cp16net> i think we should look at other options for this still
18:45:41 <cp16net> there wasnt a clear cut way to do this within trove
18:46:23 <cp16net> because many deployers today run something outside of trove to manage the updates ie. puppet/chef/others
18:46:57 <cp16net> from the user/op session
18:47:26 <cp16net> we got some feedback about needing a cluster status
18:47:34 <cp16net> rather than just a task that means nothing
18:47:51 <cp16net> something to determine healthy/unhealthy cluster
18:48:34 <cp16net> we need a way of force deleting an instance from any state
18:48:53 <cp16net> adding support for trove in openstack cli
18:49:19 <cp16net> people like that everything is together there and has multiple output options
18:49:51 <cp16net> we need to support mgmt cli calls again
18:50:12 <cp16net> something about test requirements there that we are missing
18:50:18 <cp16net> not sure what that was about for sure
18:50:35 <cp16net> for the toggle status session
18:50:52 <cp16net> we decided that the manager refactor helped mitigate this
18:51:01 <cp16net> so we all went over this and reviewed it
18:51:11 <cp16net> looks like it should be merged now
18:51:22 <peterstac> yep, the first part is in
18:51:40 <peterstac> (unfortunately with the gate broken, we haven't seen any benefit yet)
18:51:41 <cp16net> for agnostic linux distros
18:52:14 <cp16net> we are continuing the work forward around this
18:52:44 <cp16net> guest image building
18:53:14 <cp16net> this session was interesting with a variety of views
18:53:51 <cp16net> if the image should be expected to connect to internet for packages and setup or not
18:54:36 <cp16net> i think it doesnt matter and a deployer should choose their own adventure reguarding connections needed or not
18:54:45 <vkmc> o/
18:55:06 <cp16net> so this leads me to thinking that its not a good idea to remove the install packages as needed from the guest
18:56:20 <cp16net> towards the end we talked about getting locks in nova or for other projects for resources managed by a system
18:56:58 <cp16net> there maybe a way we could use keystone to manage the roles of a project that is owned by a user
18:57:43 <cp16net> there was a long discussion about this and i think towards the end we made some good arguments for moving this forward
18:57:54 <cp16net> but not sure what the outcome will be yet of the discussions
18:58:10 <cp16net> so i think that wraps up my overview
18:58:18 <cp16net> and its about time
18:58:27 <cp16net> sorry for taking up all the time at the end
18:58:30 <_imandhan_> thanks cp16net :)
18:58:43 <cp16net> but i hope for others that were not there it was benificial to hear this
18:59:03 <peterstac> yep, thanks cp16net!
18:59:04 <cp16net> if you have questions feel free to ask in the channel
18:59:13 <cp16net> thats all i got
18:59:36 <peterstac> sounds good - anything else I guess we can discuss back in #openstack-trove
18:59:45 <peterstac> #endmeeting