09:00:59 <masahito> #startmeeting blazar
09:01:00 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jun  6 09:00:59 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is masahito. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
09:01:01 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
09:01:03 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'blazar'
09:01:10 <masahito> #topic RollCall
09:01:20 <hiro-kobayashi> o/
09:01:34 <hrito> o/
09:01:36 <tejaswi> o/
09:01:50 <masahito> hi hiro-kobayashi, hrito, tejaswi
09:02:02 <masahito> today's agenda is
09:02:10 <masahito> 1. gate failure
09:02:15 <masahito> 2. instance reservation
09:02:22 <masahito> 3. next weekly meeting
09:02:29 <masahito> 4. AOB
09:02:32 <masahito> anything else?
09:02:35 <priteau> o/
09:02:45 <masahito> hello, priteau
09:02:46 <priteau> masahito: Big Tent?
09:03:01 <masahito> #chair hiro-kobayashi priteau
09:03:01 <openstack> Current chairs: hiro-kobayashi masahito priteau
09:03:08 <masahito> priteau: right.
09:03:14 <masahito> 4. BigTent
09:03:42 <masahito> let's move on to first item.
09:03:48 <masahito> #topic gate failure
09:04:30 <masahito> The gate failure in tempest tests appears again.
09:05:23 <masahito> The log of blazar-a shows oslo.messaging fails to send a message to blazar-manager.
09:05:24 <masahito> http://logs.openstack.org/64/467064/6/gate/gate-blazar-devstack-dsvm/97b6df3/logs/screen-blazar-a.txt.gz#_Jun_05_19_13_57_996255
09:06:04 <priteau> Could it be a regression from a requirements lib?
09:06:28 <masahito> This issue seemed to be fixed last week, but show up again.
09:06:33 <priteau> I don't think we have changed anything related to messaging recently
09:06:37 <masahito> priteau: maybe
09:07:04 <hiro-kobayashi> I guess that's caused by the update of oslo.messaging https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470975/
09:08:12 <hiro-kobayashi> But I'm not sure the root cause
09:08:27 <masahito> if the change is a root cause, we can check it by reverting the requirements.txt.
09:08:42 <priteau> There was a blacklist added for 5.25.0: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469539/
09:08:46 <masahito> s/reverting/revicing/
09:09:22 <priteau> But gate fails even with this blacklist: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470084/8
09:10:35 <masahito> another package could have upper constraints with 5.25.0.
09:10:48 <masahito> if so, it hits the bug.
09:12:07 <masahito> we should add !=5.25.0 to our requirements.txt to avoid the error.
09:12:13 <masahito> does it make sense?
09:12:34 <hiro-kobayashi> And 5.26, maybe
09:13:04 <masahito> right.
09:13:06 <priteau> masahito: that's what is proposed by the bot: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470084/8/requirements.txt
09:13:31 <priteau> maybe 5.26 is buggy too but hasn't been noticed?
09:14:11 <priteau> we can try a WIP patch forcing oslo.messaging to an older version
09:14:14 <hiro-kobayashi> I think it hasn't
09:16:17 <masahito> according to the commit message, we can avoid the bug with config in devstack.
09:16:18 <masahito> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469539/
09:17:16 <masahito> anyway, check the result of the patch hiro-kobayashi is pushing now. Then if it works, we can do quick fix.
09:17:36 <masahito> s/do quick fix/apply the fix/
09:17:41 <hiro-kobayashi> I pushed the patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471177/5
09:18:29 <hiro-kobayashi> I'm sorry but it also contains another changes. But I think they doesn't effect the result
09:18:42 <priteau> What are the non-requirements changes for?
09:19:56 <hiro-kobayashi> They are the remains of my investigation
09:19:57 <masahito> i think it's different change he is working on now.
09:20:07 <priteau> OK, I'll ignore :-)
09:20:22 <hiro-kobayashi> thanks
09:20:23 <priteau> Let's see what happens with the gate then
09:21:05 <masahito> let's jump on next :-)
09:21:13 <masahito> #topic instance reservation
09:22:12 <masahito> I saw some of patches related to instance reservation has CR+2 and WR+1
09:22:15 <masahito> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/467064/
09:23:08 <masahito> but spec of the feature is still in review status. so the above patch will wait the spec is merged.
09:23:17 <masahito> spec: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459533/
09:23:45 <priteau> Should I remove my W+1?
09:24:07 <masahito> or add CR+2 and/or W+1 to spec :-)
09:24:17 <priteau> Need to review still :-)
09:24:44 <masahito> zuul handles the dependency. so you don't need to remove W+1.
09:24:53 <priteau> I don't see a way to remove it anyway
09:25:42 <priteau> I just happened to see this patch in my inbox and it was a quick one to review
09:26:12 <masahito> got it.
09:26:35 <masahito> priteau: please review the spec.
09:26:41 <priteau> OK
09:27:06 <masahito> any comments about instance reservation?
09:27:32 <masahito> if nothing, move on to next.
09:28:37 <masahito> #topic next weekly meeting
09:29:24 <masahito> hiro-kobayashi and me will attend OPNFV summit next week. So we can't chair the meeting.
09:30:09 <priteau> And Gerald is on vacation
09:30:11 <masahito> Does it make sense to skip next meeting? or we'll have the meeting?
09:30:20 <masahito> priteau: right.
09:30:26 <priteau> Maybe skip due to few people attending?
09:30:57 <masahito> In other words, who can join next week?
09:31:40 <hrito> I can. but I dont have any topic
09:31:44 <priteau> I can too
09:33:39 <priteau> So maybe skip if it's just the two of us?
09:33:57 <masahito> yes. I think it's ok.
09:34:31 <masahito> priteau hrito, if either of you have topics, we'll have.
09:35:23 <priteau> I don't have any topic for now
09:35:23 <masahito> I'm thinking to send 'skip meeting mail' this weekend. If you have topics, please update the agenda wiki page.
09:35:47 <hrito> ok
09:37:00 <masahito> #topic BigTent
09:37:31 <masahito> priteau: thanks the review of the proposal.
09:37:40 <masahito> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/blazar-project-definition
09:38:20 <masahito> I'll try to push the patch in this week.
09:39:39 <hiro-kobayashi> What is the tag "team:single-vendor "?
09:40:25 <priteau> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/tags/team_single-vendor.html
09:40:31 <masahito> And I asked TC of what we need to BigTent. then thierry replied the mail.
09:40:51 <priteau> The conditions of the team tag are listed on this page
09:41:32 <priteau> In principle we are not single vendor, as there are three organizations in the active core reviewers, and more in the active non-core reviewers
09:41:40 <masahito> the definition's of the tag is written here. https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/tags/team_single-vendor.rst
09:42:12 <priteau> However, for the past 6 months lots of patches came from NTT, so maybe the script will detect us as single vendor
09:42:18 <priteau> masahito: Have you been able to run the script?
09:42:42 <hiro-kobayashi> Got it
09:42:57 <masahito> priteau: I run the script and it doesn't say "blazar shouldn't have the tag".
09:43:29 <priteau> What does it say? For me the script throws an exception
09:43:43 <masahito> the script just check whether each project shouldn't have tags.
09:44:17 <masahito> if the project doesn't have the tag, the script says nothing.
09:44:48 <masahito> sorry, wrong sentence.
09:45:04 <masahito> if Blazar doesn't have single-vender tag, the script says nothing.
09:45:17 <masahito> if Blazar have single-vender tag, the script says nothing.
09:46:08 <masahito> it means the script only shows "wrong tags" in projects.yaml.
09:47:01 <priteau> So do you think we should keep the tag for proposal?
09:47:48 <masahito> IMO, it's not good to hide the fact.
09:48:49 <priteau> I agree
09:49:12 <masahito> but we can also write the truth that we have some contributers from many organizations in the commit message.
09:49:28 <hiro-kobayashi> +1
09:49:44 <masahito> and the history of the project shows the tag, too.
09:50:04 <priteau> Hopefully we can remove the tag in the future
09:50:39 <hiro-kobayashi> definitely
09:51:16 <masahito> right.
09:52:03 <masahito> any comments for the proposal?
09:52:56 <hiro-kobayashi> +1 for the proposal. I have no additional comment
09:53:09 <hiro-kobayashi> thanks masahito!
09:53:10 <masahito> hiro-kobayashi: thanks.
09:53:17 <masahito> #topic AOB
09:53:30 <masahito> last 7 mins.
09:53:42 <hiro-kobayashi> The gate still fails...
09:53:56 <masahito> any update or info?
09:54:14 <hiro-kobayashi> Looks the same log from blazar-a
09:54:44 <hiro-kobayashi> BTW, I have an idea for getting rid of blazar-nova filter
09:54:55 <hiro-kobayashi> for the host reservation
09:55:43 <hiro-kobayashi> The solution is using AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation just like the new instance reservation feature
09:56:40 <hiro-kobayashi> Reservation owners specify the reserved resource my the availability_zone parameter when creates servers
09:56:59 <hiro-kobayashi> Not to use sheduler-hint
09:57:12 <priteau> Interesting approach
09:57:25 <masahito> sounds nice.
09:57:44 <hiro-kobayashi> I'll right details in Gerrit in this week maybe. So please review it!
09:57:52 <masahito> could you write down the idea in the bp?
09:58:00 <hiro-kobayashi> mashito: yes
09:58:06 <masahito> of course, spec is ok :-)
09:58:23 <masahito> one fyi from my side
09:59:07 <masahito> OPNFV Promise team will show a quick demo that shows blazar's reservation feature in next week.
09:59:36 <masahito> The scenario is L34-44 in this etherpad. https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/doctor_poc_at_summit_2017
10:00:21 <masahito> it only shows a host reservation barriers non-reserved instance can't be scheduled to the reserved hosts.
10:00:45 <masahito> the scenario is quit similar to the tempest scenario we have.
10:01:10 <masahito> that's my fyi.
10:01:43 <masahito> oops, running out of time.
10:02:03 <masahito> thanks all!
10:02:09 <priteau> thanks
10:02:23 <masahito> see you in next two week.
10:02:30 <hiro-kobayashi> thanks! see you!
10:02:34 <hrito> bye
10:02:41 <masahito> #endmeeting