14:00:03 <whoami-rajat> #startmeeting cinder
14:00:03 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Jun 22 14:00:03 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is whoami-rajat. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:03 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:03 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
14:00:06 <whoami-rajat> #topic roll call
14:00:43 <tosky> hi
14:00:43 <hemna> doink
14:00:49 <jsmdk> hi
14:01:02 <felipe_rodrigues> o/
14:02:08 <enriquetaso> hi
14:02:22 <whoami-rajat> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-zed-meetings
14:03:00 <TusharTgite> hi
14:03:20 <whoami-rajat> let's wait for a few minutes more
14:03:24 <geguileo> hi! o/
14:04:13 <whoami-rajat> looks like we've all the usual people here so let's get started
14:04:21 <whoami-rajat> #topic announcements
14:04:25 <yuval> hi
14:04:38 <whoami-rajat> first, Cinder spec freeze this week
14:04:59 <whoami-rajat> so we're in the week of spec freeze, and we have a bunch of specs open
14:05:21 <whoami-rajat> they're listed on the meetings etherpad page, so please take a look
14:05:38 <caiquemello[m]> o/
14:05:51 <whoami-rajat> some needs revision as i last looked but would be good to review so the author can address all comments at once
14:06:32 <whoami-rajat> also note that we are not going to implement system scope in this cycle so most of the work will be cleaning things up so no SRBAC spec needed
14:06:50 <whoami-rajat> next, Cinderlib yoga release this week
14:07:07 <whoami-rajat> we are also going to release cinderlib yoga (as it's cycle trailing) this week
14:07:16 <geguileo> I have fixed the privsep issue
14:07:32 <whoami-rajat> yes, and i think would be good to get that in before the release
14:07:37 <geguileo> that affects all branches, but it's currently breaking only wallaby (iirc)
14:07:37 <whoami-rajat> will add a comment to the release patch
14:07:47 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/842105
14:08:00 <hemna> I just updated my spec
14:08:25 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, yep, only wallaby as of now (didn't look before that since victoria is EM now)
14:08:33 <whoami-rajat> yoga and xena looks fine
14:08:45 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: apparently we had a bug from Ussuri https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinderlib/+bug/1958159
14:08:54 <geguileo> with the same issue  :-(
14:09:03 <whoami-rajat> hemna, great, will have a look
14:09:18 <geguileo> I'll try to update my spec asap, but the cinderlib fix was harder than expected to reproduce and fix
14:09:21 <whoami-rajat> oh :(
14:09:38 <yuval> geguileo can you add link to the fix?
14:09:52 <geguileo> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinderlib/+/847170
14:09:55 <yuval> tnx
14:10:07 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, yeah that one was also important, let me know if you require spec freeze exception as you've been busy with a bunch of tasks
14:10:14 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinderlib/+/847170
14:11:06 <whoami-rajat> at least we finally got motivation to fix the cinderlib issue so we're good
14:11:09 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: thanks, I'll probably need it because people will need time to review the new spec
14:11:56 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, ack, i will send out a mail after the spec freeze where you can apply for spec freeze exception
14:12:00 <whoami-rajat> but we can discuss that later
14:12:04 <geguileo> thanks
14:12:11 <whoami-rajat> thanks for fixing the cinderlib issues!
14:12:45 <whoami-rajat> moving on, October PTG Survey
14:13:03 <whoami-rajat> so i came across this survey and it has a question regarding if it is going to be a team meetup
14:13:14 <whoami-rajat> curious about it, i thought about asking it here
14:13:38 <whoami-rajat> is anyone planning to go to the October PTG in Ohio?
14:13:50 <whoami-rajat> I'm planning to fill the survey and the response might be helpful
14:14:03 <whoami-rajat> #link https://openinfrafoundation.formstack.com/forms/oct2022_ptg_team_signup
14:14:39 <geguileo> I haven't considered it yet
14:15:04 <whoami-rajat> same here
14:15:38 <enriquetaso> same
14:16:37 <whoami-rajat> I guess this will be a better topic for the video + IRC meeting next week so everyone has some time to think and discuss and can express better (in video meet)
14:17:28 <whoami-rajat> Ofcourse if most of the team don't plan to go we can conduct it virtually as we do now but let's see
14:17:46 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: when do you have to reply?
14:17:55 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, before 31st July
14:18:10 <whoami-rajat> we've time but wanted to bring it up early
14:18:19 <geguileo> ok, I'll start talking with my manager
14:18:44 <hemna> oh?   I wasn't aware of a meetup
14:19:23 <geguileo> #link https://openinfra.dev/ptg/
14:19:30 <whoami-rajat> hemna, there's one going to be in october, look for a mail with subject : Save the Date: PTG October 2022
14:19:54 <whoami-rajat> or the page geguileo provided
14:20:01 <hemna> ok as soon as that's sent, then I can ping my mgr.  I'm in VA, so it shouldn't cost too much to travel
14:20:44 <sfernand> NetApp shall send one dev for Cinder
14:21:15 <whoami-rajat> cool, looks like people are going to attend
14:21:40 <geguileo> sfernand: that sounded like a command   lol
14:21:48 <whoami-rajat> so let's discuss again in next week in the video meeting, maybe people will have some concrete responses as well
14:21:51 <sfernand> hahaha!
14:22:05 <sfernand> but tha was not my intention :P
14:22:23 <geguileo> sfernand: you probably started learning English before it changed to will  ;-)
14:22:38 <geguileo> (except for specific cases)
14:22:49 <sfernand> Maybe I will be focused on Manila for next PTG but we should have another person for Cinder
14:24:21 <whoami-rajat> so moving on to topics now
14:24:24 <whoami-rajat> #topic reviews needed for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/826484
14:24:26 <whoami-rajat> tosky, that's you
14:24:50 <tosky> so, no much to say: please review it!
14:25:07 <enriquetaso> ack!
14:25:10 <whoami-rajat> :D short and simple
14:25:26 <tosky> the review has been up for a while, but there may be some fixes needed - I'd say if there are no structural changes, they can be addressed later
14:25:30 <hemna> :)
14:25:34 <whoami-rajat> i will just paste the statement from the etherpad as it has a good reasoning for it to be reviewed
14:25:36 <whoami-rajat> this patch adds the support for cephadm (official ceph deployment way), already went through several round of reviews, probably better to merge it sooner than later
14:25:48 <hemna> does that work with ceph-iscsi ?
14:25:50 <tosky> the change should allow us to enable the newer ceph using the official deployment method (cephadm)
14:26:42 <tosky> hemna: that reminds me there is an unmerged job for ceph-iscsi, so we don't have even information on whether it works now
14:26:54 <hemna> :(
14:27:19 <hemna> is there something I can do to help?  I wrote the initial ceph-iscsi support for devstack and the cinder driver
14:28:15 <tosky> test it, but personally if the current patch won't require structural changes to properly support ceph-iscsi, if it doesn't do it already, I would move the additional fixes to another patch
14:28:32 <tosky> and we definitely need to come back to the ceph-iscsi job because we don't have a baseline for comparison
14:28:42 <hemna> ok sounds good
14:29:22 <tosky> also remember the new method is not enabled by default
14:29:28 <tosky> and manila people would like to start using it
14:30:16 <tosky> so we are not breaking anything by merging the change - of course it would be nice if a newly merged patch worked without additional fixes, but that seems to be the case here luckily
14:30:44 <tosky> unless there are other questions, please review, and $next_topic
14:31:20 <whoami-rajat> cool, thanks for the verbose explanation as well tosky
14:31:23 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/826484
14:31:27 <whoami-rajat> moving on
14:31:37 <whoami-rajat> #topic Idea https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-June/029145.html
14:31:42 <whoami-rajat> jsmdk, that's you
14:32:04 <jsmdk> Yes, as a supplement to backup drivers, I looked into hooking benji backup into cinder-backup service. I did some early development and testing, but do not know how to procede to make this hopefully become part of cinder upstream in the future.
14:32:30 <whoami-rajat> i was looking at the benji driver and looks like it can backup lvm and rbd volumes, not sure why noone has proposed it in the cinder codebase
14:33:21 <jsmdk> my code is here https://github.com/jsm222/cinder-backup-benji-driver is there a driver already?
14:33:35 <whoami-rajat> jsmdk, looks like you had the same doubt as i do, I'm not sure if we have a proper documentation for contributing a backup driver
14:33:53 <hemna> so it can only backup lvm and rbd ?
14:33:53 <whoami-rajat> but i guess you can take reference from the previously contributed drivers
14:34:05 <whoami-rajat> I'm not sure but that's what i read ^
14:34:43 <hemna> how would that work in a multi backend deployment ?
14:35:06 <jsmdk> I have only tested backing up from lvm and ceph backends, it looks for the volumetype extra specs in multibackend setups
14:35:20 <geguileo> jsmdk: some time ago I wrote a blog post on how to write a backup driver: https://gorka.eguileor.com/write-a-cinder-backup-driver/
14:35:29 <jsmdk> nice
14:35:53 <geguileo> jsmdk: your driver needs to support ALL the cinder volume backends
14:36:02 <geguileo> jsmdk: though it may be optimized for some of them
14:36:15 <amalashenko> Hello everyone! my name is alexander and i am software engineer in dell. our team develops and supports openstack drivers for dell storages.
14:36:36 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, would be good to include that in our documentation as well
14:37:06 <geguileo> amalashenko: welcome!  If you have topics you want to discuss you can either add them to the etherpad https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-zed-meetings
14:37:07 <whoami-rajat> wow it dates back to 2016
14:37:15 <jsmdk> okay, I will keep that in mind, is there a link with list of supported backends?
14:37:20 <geguileo> amalashenko: or wait until the open discussion time
14:37:43 <whoami-rajat> jsmdk, https://docs.openstack.org/cinder/latest/reference/support-matrix.html
14:37:50 <geguileo> jsmdk: I recommend you looking at the chuncked backup driver that is the basis for most backup drivers
14:38:02 <jsmdk> ok thanks
14:38:06 <geguileo> jsmdk: because there you can see how it attaches the source volume using os-brick
14:38:19 <geguileo> that way for most cases you don't have to worry what the source is
14:38:55 <hemna> which I think I changed fairly recently to allow for asynchronous operations between cinder backup and cinder volume process for getting the volume to backup (re: long clone operations in cinder volume)
14:39:00 <jsmdk> Yes that was also my impression that volume_file gives you the source of the backup.volume ?
14:39:38 <whoami-rajat> hemna, i think the request goes through scheduler now right?
14:39:58 <hemna> but doesn't os-brick return an rbd handle instead of a file path on disk for iscsi ?
14:40:22 <jsmdk> it depends on the volumes backend
14:40:40 <geguileo> iirc we always get a file-like object (maybe except RBD)
14:40:56 <hemna> whoami-rajat: no not really.   backup does an rpc cast to  cinder-volume to clone, which that can go through the scheduler, but the clone operation can take ages to do, once that clone is done, cinder volume does a cast back to backup to continue
14:40:59 <geguileo> but it should be possible to do something similar for the RBD driver as well
14:41:00 <whoami-rajat> in RBD we get a custom RBD file wrapper (faced the issue in glance store)
14:41:33 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: but we are talking about backup drivers, so it's different
14:41:39 <whoami-rajat> https://github.com/openstack/os-brick/blob/924af884db5797092e16e6176e9a70feddc9c892/os_brick/initiator/connectors/rbd.py#L130-L131
14:41:57 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: the backup method should be receiving the volume_file parameters, which is file-like in all cases (iirc)
14:42:24 <jsmdk> Yes it is, even rbd is a file like object.
14:42:25 <whoami-rajat> hemna, ack, got it
14:42:57 <geguileo> https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/2774c2537e8afabe8e46f1e5c9b08e4ff2641743/cinder/backup/manager.py#L478-L492
14:43:24 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, i was referring to os-brick returning the volume path but maybe that's different from the current discussion
14:43:27 <hemna> https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/backup/manager.py#L448-L467
14:43:41 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: yeah, this is only relative to backups
14:43:52 <whoami-rajat> ok
14:43:57 <geguileo> but I think I may have missled everytone when I mentioned os-brick
14:44:05 <geguileo> since that is managed by the backup.manager code
14:44:07 <geguileo> not the driver
14:44:14 <geguileo> my bad
14:44:23 <jsmdk> yeah it is managed by the manager. no problem
14:45:01 <geguileo> iirc we are not requiring backup drivers to have a CI, right?
14:45:35 <geguileo> afaik we only test swift
14:45:50 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, we currently don't have specific CIs for backup drivers
14:46:12 <geguileo> oh! and maybe we also test a bit the ceph one on the ceph job
14:46:29 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: so they wouldn't need to provide a CI for that new driver
14:47:08 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, yes, i don't think so but some validation would be good to confirm their driver works
14:47:26 <whoami-rajat> i will discuss this with rosmaita how we've dealt with that in the past
14:48:01 <jsmdk> Anything else I should take into consideration?
14:48:23 <geguileo> jsmdk: I don't think Benji can backup FC volumes (from the page https://benji-backup.me/)
14:48:55 <geguileo> oh, sorry, it says it can
14:49:08 <geguileo> it just says that it's better for LVM and Ceph
14:49:40 <jsmdk> okay
14:49:40 <geguileo> jsmdk: where are the backups stored?
14:50:13 <jsmdk> Oh you can choose from a number of backends NFS or even s3
14:50:25 <jsmdk> for storing the backups that is
14:50:53 <geguileo> jsmdk: mmmm, we already have an NFS and S3 backup drivers...
14:52:12 <jsmdk> I know, but do they take advantage of rbd diffs for incrementals. benji also does zstd compression
14:53:45 <geguileo> jsmdk: not for ceph to NFS
14:54:07 <geguileo> so OK, we have a reason there why the driver is useful
14:54:16 <geguileo> no more complains from me for now  ;-)
14:55:26 <whoami-rajat> jsmdk, so you can go ahead and propose a patch for the benji driver, we're very close to M2 for Zed but let's see if we can make progress on getting it in
14:55:53 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: and we should be able to test the driver with NFS
14:56:09 <geguileo> to verify that it works with devstack
14:57:23 <jsmdk> I will do some more testing, I then I will post a patch for review, and some instructionsn on testing
14:57:36 <geguileo> jsmdk: ok
14:57:38 <geguileo> whoami-rajat: I think we have 2 minutes for open discussion
14:57:40 <geguileo> lol
14:57:51 <whoami-rajat> yep, let's move to open discussion
14:57:55 <whoami-rajat> thanks jsmdk
14:57:59 <whoami-rajat> #topic open discussion
14:58:02 <jsmdk> thank you
14:58:30 <whoami-rajat> amalashenko, hello and welcome!
15:00:05 <amalashenko> whoami-rajat, nice to be there!
15:00:12 <whoami-rajat> :)
15:00:14 <whoami-rajat> we're out of time now, thanks everyone for attending!
15:00:17 <whoami-rajat> #endmeeting