| *** amyt has quit IRC | 00:54 | |
| *** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:27 | |
| *** amyt has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:44 | |
| *** grapex has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:21 | |
| *** robertmyers has quit IRC | 04:21 | |
| *** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:22 | |
| *** grapex has quit IRC | 05:07 | |
| *** amyt has quit IRC | 07:12 | |
| *** robertmyers has quit IRC | 13:22 | |
| *** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:22 | |
| *** jcru has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:04 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 15:10 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 15:11 | |
| *** amyt has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:18 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:28 | |
| *** jcru has quit IRC | 15:31 | |
| *** jcru has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:42 | |
| *** robertmyers has quit IRC | 15:42 | |
| *** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:45 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 15:54 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:54 | |
| *** robertmyers has quit IRC | 16:01 | |
| *** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:02 | |
| *** grapex has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:10 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:55 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 17:02 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:03 | |
| *** juice_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:23 | |
| *** joe5081 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:23 | |
| *** jcru has quit IRC | 17:27 | |
| *** esp1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:38 | |
| *** esp1 has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:38 | |
| *** kaganos has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:46 | |
| *** joe5081 has quit IRC | 18:00 | |
| *** jcru has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:00 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 18:20 | |
| *** esp1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:59 | |
| *** esp1 has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:59 | |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul|away | 19:25 | |
| *** vipul|away is now known as vipul | 19:29 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:38 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 21:49 | |
| *** yidclare has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:52 | |
| *** SlickNik has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:59 | |
| vipul | roll call.. Reddwarfers? | 22:00 |
|---|---|---|
| jcooley | hello! | 22:00 |
| steveleon | Hello | 22:00 |
| grapex | Greets! | 22:01 |
| SlickNik | SlickNik here | 22:01 |
| *** datsun180b has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:01 | |
| *** esp1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:01 | |
| juice_ | yo | 22:01 |
| datsun180b | hi hi | 22:01 |
| vipul | #startmeeting Reddwarf | 22:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jan 22 22:01:23 2013 UTC. The chair is vipul. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 22:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 22:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Reddwarf)" | 22:01 | |
| *** hub_cap has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:01 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'reddwarf' | 22:01 |
| hub_cap | ohai | 22:01 |
| vipul | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/RedDwarfMeeting | 22:01 |
| *** saurabhs has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:01 | |
| vipul | shall we get started? | 22:01 |
| SlickNik | yeah, let's do it | 22:02 |
| hub_cap | works for me | 22:02 |
| vipul | #topic Action Item Updates | 22:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Action Item Updates (Meeting topic: Reddwarf)" | 22:02 | |
| vipul | k, first one was mine - Blueprint on Quotas | 22:02 |
| vipul | argh trying to find | 22:02 |
| vipul | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/reddwarf/+spec/quotas | 22:03 |
| vipul | completed, for now, probably need to add some more details | 22:03 |
| hub_cap | sweet | 22:03 |
| *** djohnstone has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:03 | |
| vipul | next item.. TestR blueprint | 22:03 |
| vipul | anyone get a chance to take a peek? | 22:03 |
| hub_cap | nope. ive been knee deep in cinder code... | 22:04 |
| SlickNik | nope, still a todo for me | 22:04 |
| hub_cap | well cinder conversations and code :D | 22:04 |
| vipul | esp: does this still need another pair of eyes? or is it good to go | 22:04 |
| *** dkehn has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:04 | |
| esp1 | which part? | 22:04 |
| hub_cap | can u link it? | 22:04 |
| *** jcru is now known as jcru|away | 22:04 | |
| steveleon | link? | 22:04 |
| SlickNik | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/reddwarf/+spec/testr-unit-tests | 22:04 |
| esp1 | thx | 22:04 |
| SlickNik | np | 22:04 |
| esp1 | yeah it wouldn't hurt to have someone look at it. | 22:05 |
| grapex | I've got a question: last meeting we decided to use sqlite and mocks strategically, but I ntocied in the blue print it says to never use sqlite. | 22:05 |
| esp1 | hmm.. that would be a mistake. | 22:05 |
| esp1 | let me look | 22:05 |
| vipul | good thing we're taking a look at it :) | 22:05 |
| hub_cap | seems valid | 22:05 |
| esp1 | I think we were moving along the lines for not mixing mocks and sqlite tests | 22:05 |
| juice_ | +1 | 22:06 |
| hub_cap | ive set to approved | 22:06 |
| vipul | k, good enough | 22:06 |
| grapex | Has Nova stopped using sqlite in their unit tests? | 22:06 |
| juice_ | I would like to see tests segmented by unit and integration (incl sqllite | 22:06 |
| vipul | I personally prefer using sqllite, instead of just mocks all over the place | 22:06 |
| *** kmansel has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:06 | |
| grapex | Me too | 22:06 |
| hub_cap | im not sure if they have, but i do see that python-mysql is now necessary for test-requires | 22:06 |
| esp1 | grapex: I can see the confusion in there. we do want to use sqlite eventually just having got that far yet. | 22:06 |
| grapex | Ok, I know how we can add it easily | 22:07 |
| hub_cap | which is annoying to me personally :) | 22:07 |
| grapex | I just wrote a test in testr that makes use of it | 22:07 |
| grapex | Assuming sqlite can be used with multiple procs, we should be OK | 22:07 |
| esp1 | yep shouldn't be a big deal. just don't want to mix paradigms with mock vs sqlite | 22:07 |
| SlickNik | For some integration tests, sql-lite does make sense. | 22:07 |
| vipul | A lot of the stuff in models, i'd rather have it make real sql calls | 22:08 |
| grapex | "unit" tests doesn't mean to only use mocks, its one tool in the box | 22:08 |
| juice_ | SlickNik I agree that sqllite would be ok in integration but not unittests | 22:08 |
| hub_cap | nova seems to mock it | 22:08 |
| vipul | i think they tend to lean towards Fixtures | 22:08 |
| esp1 | yeah, yer all correct. we need to do a better job of naming things. | 22:08 |
| vipul | not complete mock | 22:08 |
| juice_ | grapex: doesn't have to use mock but shouldn't be using a database | 22:08 |
| steveleon | i have some unitests for the guestagent... specifically for query-creation classes...should those be tested using sqlite? | 22:08 |
| hub_cap | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/tools/test-requires | 22:08 |
| hub_cap | https://github.com/openstack/nova/tree/master/nova/tests/db | 22:08 |
| esp1 | maybe just break them out: mock tests, sqlite tests. | 22:08 |
| vipul | steveleon: I'd think those types of tests would be better against a sqllite | 22:09 |
| juice_ | how about "int-lite" | 22:09 |
| esp1 | juice: nice one. | 22:09 |
| vipul | ok looks like we need a longer discussion on this | 22:09 |
| esp1 | steveleon: I was thinking of doing both | 22:09 |
| hub_cap | ya table it vipul | 22:09 |
| grapex | juice_: We could put tests like that in the existing tests that run before testr | 22:09 |
| vipul | #action Discuss use of mock/sqllite/fixtures | 22:09 |
| vipul | Ok, next item.. Mutlipel images | 22:10 |
| esp1 | sounds good | 22:10 |
| vipul | i think we settled that | 22:10 |
| juice_ | working on it now | 22:10 |
| SlickNik | Yeah, we had a discussion on that. | 22:10 |
| vipul | k, the agreement was that we'd push percona 'element' to RD-int | 22:10 |
| juice_ | #agreed | 22:11 |
| vipul | next item.. dkehn, SlickNik: setting up CI | 22:11 |
| SlickNik | #agreed | 22:11 |
| dkehn | SlickNik, has the changes in the vm-gate functions and I'm testing as we speack | 22:11 |
| dkehn | once completed will move to CI upstream | 22:11 |
| SlickNik | So far I've got the post-devstack changes in for redstack. | 22:12 |
| SlickNik | And the simple tests are working. | 22:12 |
| vipul | cool | 22:12 |
| SlickNik | There are a few black-box tests that are failing on me that I'm still debugging. | 22:12 |
| vipul | #action dkehn, SlickNik to complete CI with devstack-vm-gate with blackbox tests | 22:12 |
| SlickNik | and dkehn is working on integrating upstream with the vmgate. | 22:12 |
| hub_cap | have yall gotten it working on cloud servers? | 22:13 |
| hub_cap | rax cloud servers :) | 22:13 |
| vipul | k, that's next | 22:13 |
| SlickNik | We're doing this on HPCloud server. | 22:13 |
| dkehn | hpcloud only | 22:13 |
| vipul | anyone have a rax account :) | 22:13 |
| SlickNik | I don't have access to RAX cloud servers :) | 22:13 |
| hub_cap | ill gladly spawn u one | 22:13 |
| dkehn | dkehn, me either | 22:13 |
| hub_cap | tomorrow just remind me | 22:13 |
| SlickNik | okay, hub_cap, I'll ping you. | 22:13 |
| hub_cap | np | 22:13 |
| hub_cap | good luck w/ networking | 22:13 |
| SlickNik | Will be good to see how/if they're different. | 22:13 |
| hub_cap | it seems completely broken | 22:13 |
| hub_cap | thats where i stopped :D | 22:14 |
| vipul | somehow the CI guys are able to run there though | 22:14 |
| vipul | they may be doing some hacks | 22:14 |
| hub_cap | ya but they dont do tests from _in_ teh guest | 22:14 |
| hub_cap | they just spawn a instance | 22:14 |
| vipul | oh i see | 22:14 |
| hub_cap | we can do that | 22:14 |
| hub_cap | ya... | 22:14 |
| hub_cap | maybe someone on your end tho has some fu | 22:14 |
| vipul | #action SlickNik to test on Rax Cloud Servers | 22:15 |
| vipul | next item.. update on HP CLoud Server and int-tests | 22:15 |
| hub_cap | i torqued it a few times too ;) | 22:15 |
| vipul | I still haven't been able to get a good run on hpcloud instance | 22:15 |
| hub_cap | wtf... | 22:15 |
| hub_cap | thats sucky | 22:15 |
| vipul | wiht "cheat codes" i was successful | 22:15 |
| juice_ | vipul: how many tests fail? | 22:15 |
| hub_cap | oh thats at least good... but a full run is failing? | 22:15 |
| vipul | but the tests have some funky dependency and hard to pinpoint exactly which one | 22:16 |
| vipul | mainly the Stop Test | 22:16 |
| vipul | but that causes a couple of skips | 22:16 |
| vipul | all others pass on a full run | 22:16 |
| hub_cap | vipul: maybe we can shed some light... if u can give someone like tim a login to a machine maybe he can play around w/ it | 22:16 |
| hub_cap | or me when i get some time | 22:16 |
| vipul | K, that will help. | 22:16 |
| vipul | #action Vipul hub_cap and grapex to debug int-tests on hpcloud | 22:17 |
| hub_cap | word | 22:17 |
| vipul | next item: cheat codes | 22:17 |
| vipul | cp16net gave us a brief intro to them last meeting | 22:17 |
| vipul | i think we're good unless there are other tricks we should know | 22:17 |
| hub_cap | i think there were just 1 or 2 right? | 22:18 |
| hub_cap | the instance is already created one | 22:18 |
| juice_ | is it "up - down - up - down - left - right - left - right - a - b - enter" ? | 22:18 |
| vipul | lol | 22:18 |
| hub_cap | juice_: select start | 22:18 |
| vipul | yes, that's the one i saw, what's the other? | 22:18 |
| juice_ | no wonder it never worked | 22:18 |
| hub_cap | my gamepad has no enter key | 22:18 |
| hub_cap | grapex: is there another cheat code? | 22:18 |
| juice_ | what are "cheat codes" | 22:18 |
| juice_ | in this context? | 22:19 |
| vipul | running integration tests, without creating an instance during the run | 22:19 |
| hub_cap | juice_: special ways to alter the executiojn of the tests | 22:19 |
| grapex | The only other one is TESTS_DO_NOT_DELETE_INSTANCE | 22:19 |
| SlickNik | env variables that you can set to speed up tests | 22:19 |
| juice_ | ah | 22:19 |
| grapex | Set that to True and it skips the delete. | 22:19 |
| hub_cap | and of course there is | 22:19 |
| grapex | There's really only two. | 22:19 |
| juice_ | gots it | 22:19 |
| hub_cap | --group=blackbox --stop | 22:19 |
| SlickNik | grapex: I've found that one especially useful. | 22:19 |
| hub_cap | that one will stop tests on first failure | 22:19 |
| grapex | --stop is a nose argument | 22:19 |
| hub_cap | ya | 22:19 |
| vipul | cool, good stuff | 22:20 |
| vipul | next: hub_cap to talk to heckj and bcwaldon about how they are doing their next gen specs | 22:20 |
| hub_cap | ./redstack int-tests --group=blackbox --stop <--useful if u wantt to diagnose | 22:20 |
| hub_cap | have not done so yet, its on my list | 22:20 |
| vipul | #action hub_cap to talk to heckj and bcwaldon about how they are doing their next gen specs | 22:20 |
| hub_cap | ive talked /w my mgr and we are going to start drafting v2 | 22:20 |
| vipul | next: hub_cap to get the featureset for V2 started, BP & wiki | 22:20 |
| hub_cap | next week i will have something | 22:20 |
| hub_cap | thats same. put it on the action items | 22:20 |
| hub_cap | they are really one in the same | 22:20 |
| hub_cap | the v2 api is my top prio after i finish cinder | 22:21 |
| hub_cap | so next week sometime | 22:21 |
| vipul | K, at some point we need to sync up regarding feature set for v2 | 22:21 |
| vipul | hub_cap to talk to mikeA about timelines for v1 wadl | 22:21 |
| vipul | I think you mentioned that's coming? | 22:21 |
| hub_cap | ya | 22:21 |
| vipul | any timeline? | 22:22 |
| hub_cap | so let me first talk about v2 "sync" | 22:22 |
| hub_cap | i totally agree we need to sync up | 22:22 |
| hub_cap | ill give u guys teh wiki links so u can add/edit as u see fit adn we can discuss | 22:22 |
| hub_cap | i dont want this to be a autocratic spec | 22:22 |
| hub_cap | now that im off that soapbox, v1 | 22:22 |
| hub_cap | mike A is working on it now. he should have it ready soon... he didnt give an exact timeline | 22:23 |
| jcooley | hub_cap: also regarding use of wiki. | 22:23 |
| hub_cap | #link https://github.com/stackforge/database-api | 22:23 |
| vipul | Ok, works for me. Just need to make sure we're aligned as far as features, and we can iterate on the wiki if that's the way it's done | 22:23 |
| jcooley | is there a place we can start putting some of the knowledge we're uncovering around setting up, running, etc? | 22:23 |
| hub_cap | vipul: ill find it out some way or antoher and keep u in the email chain/etc/... | 22:24 |
| hub_cap | jcooley: id say create some wiki.openstack pages | 22:24 |
| hub_cap | maybe we need a "landing" page for reddwarf | 22:24 |
| hub_cap | and to put links on that... i _hate_ the wiki they have | 22:24 |
| jcooley | ok, didn't know if you had an area you were currently using for similar | 22:24 |
| jcooley | i'm just seeing us create knowledge internally that we should be sharing with the community | 22:25 |
| vipul | #action, link Reddwarf wiki area (create one if necessary) to http://wiki.openstack.org/Projects | 22:25 |
| hub_cap | for instance, there is a page for incubated project | 22:25 |
| hub_cap | http://wiki.openstack.org/Heat | 22:25 |
| vipul | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Reddwarf | 22:25 |
| vipul | is still not created, probably the place to start | 22:25 |
| hub_cap | http://wiki.openstack.org/Reddwarf | 22:25 |
| hub_cap | i jsut did | 22:25 |
| SlickNik | Probably a good idea. | 22:25 |
| hub_cap | god it so slow | 22:25 |
| vipul | ok, last item juice: percona elements | 22:26 |
| jcooley | hub_cap: sweet | 22:26 |
| vipul | juice ^^? | 22:27 |
| hub_cap | juice_: ^ ^ | 22:27 |
| hub_cap | :D | 22:27 |
| vipul | sneaky | 22:27 |
| hub_cap | pete | 22:27 |
| vipul | lol | 22:27 |
| SlickNik | heh | 22:27 |
| esp1 | let me throw something at juice | 22:27 |
| hub_cap | oh this isint word association :) | 22:27 |
| juice_ | what is the question? | 22:28 |
| vipul | #action juice_ to push percona bits to Redddwarf-Int | 22:28 |
| SlickNik | oh, oh…Do I see projectiles... | 22:28 |
| juice_ | nerd frisbee please | 22:28 |
| juice_ | nerf | 22:28 |
| hub_cap | either way | 22:28 |
| vipul | ok done with action items.. | 22:28 |
| vipul | #topic CI Updates | 22:28 |
| esp1 | juice: all I have over here are keyboards and rocks | 22:28 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "CI Updates (Meeting topic: Reddwarf)" | 22:28 | |
| vipul | I htink SlickNik and dkehn covered most of this | 22:29 |
| dkehn | I think so | 22:29 |
| SlickNik | yeah covered it earlier. | 22:29 |
| vipul | wanna recap? | 22:29 |
| hub_cap | yup, and all thats left is me to spin up a cloud isntacne for yall | 22:29 |
| vipul | ok, we're good then | 22:29 |
| juice_ | what about the other topic quotas | 22:29 |
| vipul | we're targetting this by end of week? to push upstream? | 22:29 |
| vipul | juice_: it's coming... http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/RedDwarfMeeting | 22:30 |
| SlickNik | dkehn was looking into pushing upstream, he probably has a better idea of the timeline for that…dkehn? | 22:30 |
| dkehn | I'm targeting as ASAP, but we must get it working and then separate it out into their schema (wrapper, etc.. | 22:31 |
| dkehn | but yes, as soon as possible, I'm not the only one involved with CI | 22:31 |
| vipul | just an FYI for hub_cap, grapex: We're going to push upstream while invoking simple-tests for now | 22:32 |
| vipul | until we verify that blackbox runs everywhere | 22:32 |
| hub_cap | as in, you are testing locally before u push right? | 22:32 |
| dkehn | once in upstream then we can add things to it | 22:32 |
| hub_cap | oh nm, simple-tests | 22:32 |
| SlickNik | I've got the simple tests running successfully on an HP Cloud instance after a post devstack build. Will talk to grapex about some issues I'm running into with the full suite of black-box tests. | 22:32 |
| dkehn | yes | 22:32 |
| hub_cap | well int-tests should work on the cloud isntance | 22:32 |
| hub_cap | but simple-tests wont even work for u as is | 22:32 |
| hub_cap | :) | 22:32 |
| vipul | right, _should_ | 22:32 |
| hub_cap | sure, we run em all the time :D | 22:33 |
| hub_cap | but we run on old networked cloud servers b4 the new nova switch | 22:33 |
| hub_cap | and using openvz | 22:33 |
| hub_cap | :D | 22:33 |
| grapex | vipul SlickNik: As long as running all of blackbox remains a goal I'm good. | 22:33 |
| esp1 | should we rip out simple-tests ? | 22:33 |
| vipul | right :) | 22:33 |
| vipul | grapex: Yep, blackbox is the end goal | 22:33 |
| esp1 | or should we wait... | 22:33 |
| hub_cap | once we get int-tests solid we should remove simple-tests | 22:33 |
| esp1 | cool | 22:33 |
| SlickNik | grapex, I'm with you 100% we want to run all of blackbox. | 22:33 |
| hub_cap | id like to figure out why your int-tests are failing, and im volunteering grapex time :) (jk) | 22:34 |
| vipul | do you guys run int-tests in KVM? | 22:34 |
| hub_cap | ya | 22:34 |
| SlickNik | this is the first step so we can iron out issues with pushing CI upstream and work on the testing issues in parallel. | 22:34 |
| hub_cap | im 100% public these days | 22:34 |
| hub_cap | and your int-tests work in local env right? | 22:34 |
| vipul | right, just not in a cloud instance | 22:34 |
| hub_cap | coo | 22:34 |
| esp1 | yeah, they run fine in vmware fusion | 22:34 |
| hub_cap | lets figure out what the deal is w/ that this wk | 22:34 |
| hub_cap | ill spare some time vipul tomorrow if u want to chat it up | 22:35 |
| hub_cap | and give me a login so i can watch em go | 22:35 |
| hub_cap | (or not go...) | 22:35 |
| vipul | ok, so in the meantime we dont' want that holding up, which is why we push with simple-tests, and change it up later | 22:35 |
| vipul | hub_cap: sounds good | 22:35 |
| hub_cap | sure | 22:35 |
| vipul | k, next topic | 22:35 |
| hub_cap | but simple-tests will fail on a cloud server too ;) | 22:35 |
| hub_cap | lets roll | 22:35 |
| vipul | #topic Unit Test updates | 22:35 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Unit Test updates (Meeting topic: Reddwarf)" | 22:35 | |
| steveleon | annashen and I have been adding unittests to the guest agents | 22:36 |
| vipul | so we've got lots of tests the python-reddwarfclient + guestagent | 22:36 |
| vipul | grapex: wanna discuss what we need to do push the last two reviews through? | 22:36 |
| grapex | Sure | 22:36 |
| SlickNik | yeah hub_cap I'll try and see if I can make the tests (networking) work on cloud server. Get me a login.. :) | 22:37 |
| grapex | I've been writing an email about it for awhile | 22:37 |
| hub_cap | SlickNik: ill one up u, ill give u a dedicated server! | 22:37 |
| *** jcru|away is now known as jcru | 22:37 | |
| grapex | So first off, I want to say I know the code can be confusing and I'm sorry. I also apologize that there are unused functions and cruft and junk in the code. :( | 22:37 |
| vipul | grapex: just got the email | 22:37 |
| SlickNik | hub_cap: sweet! thx, will ping you after the meeting. | 22:38 |
| grapex | That said, while writing unit tests, especially for the reference guest which has no coverage other than the public tests that just started running, feel free to delete methods if you believe they aren't used. | 22:38 |
| steveleon | grapex: It's all good... It's been a very good experience for us :-) | 22:38 |
| grapex | The integration tests should catch big issues like that | 22:38 |
| vipul | Yep, the issue is we don't have a way to check coverage with Integration Tests, unless you go through every test | 22:39 |
| grapex | plus we'll catch it in the gerrit reviews, if not we're not doing a good job of reviewing the pull requests. | 22:39 |
| grapex | vipul: Yes, that is a problem. | 22:39 |
| grapex | Maybe we need to talk to Monty or someone about this, but is it necessary to cover even methods we really can't test in the unit test environment? | 22:40 |
| grapex | I think the code would be clearer if we just added no cover directives | 22:40 |
| grapex | Then made sure to hit those with either integration tests or functional tests | 22:40 |
| vipul | Yep, I agree there is a probably a good balance... | 22:41 |
| vipul | at the same time.. eventually I think we'd like to get to a point where we can gate on a Coverage % | 22:41 |
| grapex | Another thing about the reference guest - Sneaky Pete has functional tests which do things like make sure the utility code to hit a MySQL db or call other processes is actually working. | 22:41 |
| grapex | vipul: We could add no coverage directives and then make the case during the gerrit review as to why | 22:41 |
| vipul | That could work.. | 22:42 |
| hub_cap | vipul: lets be careful about gating on coverage %s too... does any other project do it? | 22:42 |
| grapex | if we also added integration or functional tests as we do that, it would be kosher | 22:42 |
| vipul | not yet, but they'd like to.. so not saying we're ready to yet.. but eventually | 22:42 |
| hub_cap | ok cool id like to watch a openstack project do it for a while first | 22:42 |
| hub_cap | see how it works (or doesnt) for them :D | 22:42 |
| grapex | Second thing I would like to propose is that we spend some time deleting code that isn't currently isn't covered by the coverage report of the int-tests as run in Tox | 22:43 |
| jcooley | yah, was thinking we could be conservative. just to make sure the coverage doesn't slide as new code is added. | 22:43 |
| grapex | When I got the integration tests working in tox the coverage was something like 78% | 22:43 |
| grapex | When I looked at what wasn't covered, some of it seemed like it could be cruft | 22:43 |
| vipul | ++ | 22:44 |
| hub_cap | and we should set the entire openstack/common dir to nocover too :D | 22:44 |
| grapex | I'm worried that by leaving this junk in there we could be wasting people's time if they cover it. :( | 22:44 |
| grapex | hub_cap: Agreed | 22:44 |
| jcooley | ++ | 22:44 |
| hub_cap | god why isisnt that a pip library :D | 22:44 |
| grapex | So maybe the thing to do is aggressively remove junk first- kind of like when you're trying to put on muscle, first you lose all the weight you can and make sure the pounds you're adding aren't fat. :) | 22:45 |
| vipul | #agreed grapex, we'll need your assistance in Identifying some of the cruft.. since we're in a 'scared to delete cuz we don't know enough about it yet' mode | 22:45 |
| SlickNik | #agreed lol, while I don't quite agree with your analogy grapex, I completely echo your sentiments :) | 22:45 |
| hub_cap | lol grapex | 22:46 |
| grapex | vipul: I really appreciate that you are being careful with deleting stuff, I think that's coming from the right place. However the goal of the integration tests is to find anything wrong in the "happy path" so if necessary code is missing we should find out quick. | 22:46 |
| hub_cap | grapex is quite aggressive | 22:46 |
| grapex | Plus if anyone deletes something we need we'll be quick to point it out. | 22:46 |
| grapex | I'm aggressive, like an inverted junk yard dog that destroys junk rather than protecting it! | 22:46 |
| SlickNik | Having dead code to maintain is no fun. | 22:47 |
| hub_cap | having terrible analogies to maintain is no fun either :P | 22:47 |
| vipul | Ok grapex: so let's do this... can you guys look over the two reviews.. let's figure out what shouldn't be unit tests.. and get some of that merged | 22:47 |
| grapex | vipul: Will do. | 22:47 |
| hub_cap | agreed. grapex is your man for those | 22:47 |
| esp1 | grapex: I'll ping ya in a bit to see if we can figure stuff out | 22:47 |
| vipul | #action grapex to look over guestagent unit test reviews, work with steveleon to get them merged | 22:48 |
| vipul | alright.. let's move on to the next thing | 22:48 |
| steveleon | ill take some of the comments and suggestion from grapex and apply them to my patches | 22:48 |
| vipul | #topic Quota / Rate limiting | 22:48 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Quota / Rate limiting (Meeting topic: Reddwarf)" | 22:48 | |
| vipul | Ok we're starting to look at adding supprot for quotas, rate limits in REddwarf this sprint | 22:48 |
| vipul | Just quickly looked over repose | 22:49 |
| vipul | i guess the discussion is: what should this look like? since Repose is another standalone service | 22:49 |
| vipul | do we want to do something lightweight instead? | 22:49 |
| vipul | anyone looked at 'turnstile'? | 22:49 |
| hub_cap | well id say that we should not reinvent the wheel here :) | 22:49 |
| hub_cap | so wrt turnstyle i know nova said they would move to it eventually | 22:50 |
| jcooley | don't do another tier. either repose (ok, maybe turnstile). | 22:50 |
| juice_ | turnstile here appeared to have limited functionality | 22:50 |
| hub_cap | but they are using repose currently | 22:50 |
| jcooley | but we should use an openstack project if one exists. | 22:50 |
| hub_cap | so i really dont want to have a 3rd type | 22:50 |
| hub_cap | jcooley: thats repose :P | 22:50 |
| hub_cap | ish | 22:50 |
| jcooley | turnstile != repose :) | 22:50 |
| hub_cap | thats what they are trying to do w/ repose | 22:50 |
| vipul | hub_cap: nova has their own quota class i thought | 22:51 |
| jcooley | hub_cap: in agreement on no 3rd option | 22:51 |
| hub_cap | ya its legacy | 22:51 |
| jcooley | we looked at the repose project at the OS conference in SD. | 22:51 |
| hub_cap | its been around for a VERY long time | 22:51 |
| jcooley | looks pretty interesting. | 22:51 |
| vipul | another potential Issue.. Repose is java | 22:51 |
| jcooley | ugh. yah, so was our global proxy tier :( | 22:51 |
| vipul | since it's standalone, probably not a big deal.. but surprised that Openstack is choosing that | 22:52 |
| hub_cap | well... repose is trying to get into openstack | 22:52 |
| hub_cap | and at rax we are using it as a quota system | 22:52 |
| jcooley | we may actually have to run it in our prod environment due to the HP deltas from Keystone, but... don't want this in the reference implementation. want to keep that clean from corporate operational requirements | 22:52 |
| hub_cap | but ure right, its not _the_ defacto | 22:52 |
| hub_cap | so maybe its not a bad idea to have something, albeit small | 22:53 |
| hub_cap | https://github.com/openstack/nova/commits/master/nova/quota.py | 22:53 |
| vipul | any reason why this is not in oslo? | 22:53 |
| hub_cap | https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/1cf475d7a135c1078cf7df11c261618af501dc37 :) | 22:53 |
| juice_ | an embedded class over a standalone service | 22:53 |
| jcooley | repose is solving the right requirements. want rate limiting, white-listing, black-listing, SSL termination, Keystone middleware | 22:53 |
| hub_cap | vipul: thats a good question | 22:53 |
| juice_ | sounds like a good place to start | 22:53 |
| juice_ | use something like nova-quota unless there is a clear direction | 22:54 |
| hub_cap | but even https://github.com/klmitch/turnstile is old as crap | 22:54 |
| hub_cap | juice_: nova quota has no per user quota support fyi | 22:54 |
| vipul | jcooley, hub_cap: sounds like we wnat both an embedded quota solution + a repose hook | 22:54 |
| jcooley | oooh. need to have per-user or per-tenant | 22:55 |
| hub_cap | its VERY limited | 22:55 |
| juice_ | can we just write our own for the time being in the likes of nova-quota? | 22:55 |
| jcooley | vipul: ++ | 22:55 |
| hub_cap | well why not try to push something to oslo instead? | 22:55 |
| jcooley | repose goes in front, so just need to turn off any embeded solution | 22:55 |
| vipul | #link https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/quota.py | 22:56 |
| vipul | yea, that's an option, push a generic framework to Oslo | 22:56 |
| hub_cap | ya i wouldnt necessarily use cinder as the golden child vipul | 22:56 |
| hub_cap | #link https://github.com/openstack/nova/commits/master/nova/quota.py | 22:56 |
| vipul | looks liek they all basically have their own | 22:57 |
| grapex | jcooley: Or use both for double protection and give ops the joy of ensuring the configs are in sync. :) | 22:57 |
| hub_cap | right lets do this | 22:57 |
| jcooley | grapex: yah, that's it! | 22:57 |
| hub_cap | we shouldnt decide this w/o buyin from some core peeps | 22:57 |
| hub_cap | lets talk to core nova/cinder/oslo | 22:57 |
| hub_cap | and see how they feel about either 1) moving something into oslo, or 2) a external wsgi service | 22:57 |
| hub_cap | rather than hack up and have YAQS (yet another quota system) | 22:58 |
| jcooley | exactly | 22:58 |
| vipul | #action hub_cap and juice_ to talk to core nova/cinder/oslo about generic quota embedded vs external service | 22:58 |
| jcooley | (it's not just about quotas)... | 22:58 |
| hub_cap | ok works for me | 22:58 |
| hub_cap | thx vipul | 22:58 |
| vipul | right, need to take into account rate limits | 22:58 |
| jcooley | need SSL term, DOS protection (white/black listing), etc | 22:59 |
| hub_cap | ya those are another form of quotas from repos's perslective | 22:59 |
| hub_cap | rate and absolute limits is what we need to start with | 22:59 |
| hub_cap | but we digress... lets just work it offline w/ the core teams | 22:59 |
| vipul | alright.. let's get the discussion started at least | 23:00 |
| juice_ | who will take the reigns on that one | 23:00 |
| hub_cap | juice_: see above | 23:00 |
| hub_cap | its me and u | 23:00 |
| vipul | juice_ can you start by talking to mordred, and then we bring it up to the Oslo members | 23:00 |
| hub_cap | ill talk w/ nova/cinder/glance ptls | 23:00 |
| juice_ | ok | 23:01 |
| hub_cap | adn we can reconvene in a day or 2 | 23:01 |
| vipul | i'm sure this is something everyone's thought about | 23:01 |
| hub_cap | and eveyrone has a differing answer :D | 23:01 |
| hub_cap | woo openstack! | 23:01 |
| jcooley | woot! | 23:01 |
| vipul | k, we got a plan... | 23:01 |
| hub_cap | word | 23:01 |
| vipul | i think that's all for items | 23:01 |
| vipul | #topic Open Discussion | 23:02 |
| SlickNik | that sounds good. | 23:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: Reddwarf)" | 23:02 | |
| hub_cap | and i dont really have any "extra" items to discuss... | 23:02 |
| vipul | anything else people want to get off ther chest | 23:02 |
| SlickNik | nothing from my end. | 23:02 |
| grapex | Functional tests | 23:02 |
| vipul | k. | 23:02 |
| grapex | In the blue print, there's talk about creating some kind of new framework | 23:02 |
| grapex | I don't see the point. We can just add new groups in the RDI tests and run them as part of CI. | 23:02 |
| esp1 | grapex: this is the testr thing right? | 23:02 |
| grapex | Yes. | 23:03 |
| hub_cap | brb | 23:03 |
| esp1 | yeah, there were folks who wanted to get closer to what openstack is using. | 23:03 |
| grapex | We do that at Racks for some internal stuff relating to billing, things we need to access certain resources for. There's not that many great examples of using it in the public. | 23:03 |
| esp1 | I think CI guys want to be able to run tests in parallel someday | 23:04 |
| lifeless | esp1: CI does run in parallel | 23:04 |
| lifeless | esp1: for some projects. Want it for ~all | 23:04 |
| vipul | Is this a question of whether to add non-integration tests to probosis? | 23:04 |
| grapex | I see. We'll next hackathon at Rackspace I'll be looking at making Proboscis integrate with testr and run non-dependent test series together. | 23:04 |
| esp1 | lifeless: right not at the moment but I think it's a goal of their's in the future | 23:04 |
| lifeless | esp1: hmm? nova tests *already* run in parallel in CI | 23:05 |
| lifeless | esp1: I may be confused about what you mean. | 23:05 |
| hub_cap | ya fo sure | 23:06 |
| grapex | vipul: My point is we use proboscis to do that internally and it's proven easy. The benefits is that all of the setup code to communicate to the database and other resources already lives there. | 23:06 |
| hub_cap | hi lifeless :) | 23:06 |
| esp1 | lifeless: sorry misread. but I mean that folks want to run reddwarf tests in parallel one day. | 23:06 |
| SlickNik | lifeless: I think esp1 is talking about the current reddwarf tests running through proboscis. | 23:06 |
| lifeless | ah right | 23:06 |
| grapex | I see the concern about parallel testing though. I think we'll alleviate it by reducing use of "depends_on" (which is overused now) and getting testr to fire off every non-related series of methods. | 23:06 |
| vipul | grapex, esp1: Getting probosis to run testr may be the solution here... if we can do that _and not make them all depend on one another_ then i am ok with it | 23:06 |
| lifeless | yes, doing that in parallel +1 ;). Happy to advise on any testr questions. | 23:06 |
| jcooley | yes, want the tests to run in parallel. don't want to write tests in probosis; want to use testr. | 23:07 |
| grapex | lifeless: Thanks | 23:07 |
| lifeless | [and other stuff, but I suspect the only new thing here for you folk is testr :P] | 23:07 |
| grapex | jcooley: Keep in mind testr is the runner...we can still make use of test tools and everything. | 23:07 |
| jcooley | just don't want to see a) reinventing the wheel, or b) a bunch of red-dwarf-only tools | 23:08 |
| esp1 | regarding question of "functional" tests we were thinking of creating a separate package for tests that make will make use of sqlite there. | 23:08 |
| grapex | jcooley: I agree, I don't want to rewrite tests we've been depending on. | 23:08 |
| hub_cap | testr is the pirate of tests for sure | 23:08 |
| esp1 | perhaps functional is not a good name. | 23:08 |
| jcooley | grapex: yep. | 23:09 |
| juice_ | I think it is misleading to use functional in that context | 23:09 |
| jcooley | keep what we have, migrate eventually if we can -- if it makes sense. | 23:09 |
| juice_ | it seems like the current int-tests are more functional than int-tests | 23:09 |
| grapex | So are we talking about unittests + live resources? | 23:09 |
| esp1 | juice_: yep. so how about sqlitetests? | 23:09 |
| SlickNik | grapex: sounds good, I'm okay with proboscis as long as we can parallelize with testr. | 23:10 |
| vipul | grapex: so how about this... new tests that are not integration tests for now are just testr tests | 23:10 |
| esp1 | grapex: yeah | 23:10 |
| esp1 | I want to exercise the actual code and not mocks | 23:10 |
| jcooley | ++ | 23:10 |
| juice_ | depends on your background but I think the more common definition would be unit tests, integration tests (sqllite with multiple classes) and functional (almost near production / use case based) | 23:10 |
| vipul | and things that are integration-tests, and ones that need the additional 'live resources' need to go in as probosis | 23:10 |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 23:11 | |
| hub_cap | ok so are we in agreement? | 23:11 |
| grapex | vipul: Agreed, for now let's just keep it to unit tests we can run in tox and integration tests we run in the VM. This will include things that might for example test reference guest methods like "start_mysql" | 23:11 |
| vipul | #agreed | 23:12 |
| SlickNik | #agreed | 23:12 |
| hub_cap | #agrease | 23:12 |
| vipul | Ok, if that's all, i'm going to wrap it up | 23:12 |
| hub_cap | put a bow on it vipul | 23:13 |
| vipul | #endmeeting | 23:13 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings (alternate) || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 23:13 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jan 22 23:13:03 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 23:13 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/reddwarf/2013/reddwarf.2013-01-22-22.01.html | 23:13 |
| SlickNik | thanks all | 23:13 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/reddwarf/2013/reddwarf.2013-01-22-22.01.txt | 23:13 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/reddwarf/2013/reddwarf.2013-01-22-22.01.log.html | 23:13 |
| vipul | laters | 23:13 |
| SlickNik | anon | 23:13 |
| jcooley | cheers | 23:13 |
| hub_cap | l8r all | 23:13 |
| dkehn | l8r | 23:13 |
| *** hub_cap has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:13 | |
| *** robertmyers has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:13 | |
| *** dkehn has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:13 | |
| *** esp1 has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:13 | |
| *** saurabhs has quit IRC | 23:13 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 23:13 | |
| *** djohnstone has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:13 | |
| *** djohnstone_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:14 | |
| *** datsun180b has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:18 | |
| *** djohnstone_ has quit IRC | 23:19 | |
| *** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:21 | |
| *** robertmyers has quit IRC | 23:25 | |
| *** jdbarry has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:31 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 23:35 | |
| *** grapex has quit IRC | 23:40 | |
| *** grapex has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:41 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 23:45 | |
| *** kaganos has quit IRC | 23:50 | |
| *** jcru has quit IRC | 23:55 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!