16:01:27 #startmeeting hyper-v 16:01:28 Meeting started Tue Sep 3 16:01:27 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is primeministerp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:29 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:01:31 The meeting name has been set to 'hyper_v' 16:01:34 hi everyone 16:01:53 we'll wait a couple more minutes for the others to join 16:02:27 Hey! 16:02:30 hey rob 16:02:44 Hi Peter 16:03:04 back from vacation with a bang today 16:03:07 ;) 16:03:56 hola 16:04:02 hi alex 16:04:12 i know pedro's time is limited today 16:05:01 so if we can start 16:05:20 #topic review backlog 16:06:00 so obviously we still have the problem of our backlog of reviews 16:06:24 and it looks like unless we get a priority bump on our blueprints 16:06:40 we might not get them reviewed 16:07:19 I'm frankly quite concerned about the situation 16:07:22 well 16:07:24 so am i 16:07:41 this will lead straight towards a fork for most drivers IMO 16:07:51 we are not the only ones in this situation 16:08:08 basically driver specific blueprints are marked as low priority 16:08:10 has there been any other discussion of this from the other hypervisors, like xen and vmare? 16:08:33 in the ML there was already some discussion 16:08:43 I forwarded you already some links 16:08:45 still got 500+ to go 16:08:58 in general look for "frustration" in the ML subjects and there are quite a few :-) 16:09:04 hahaha 16:09:06 thanks 16:09:11 unfortunately 16:09:23 i wish it was something different 16:09:30 let me see if we can get Russell 16:09:35 russellb: ping 16:11:30 so 16:11:31 hey 16:11:36 hey guys 16:11:39 something has to be prioritized, right? 16:11:39 thanks for the time 16:11:40 hi ru 16:11:43 hi russellb 16:11:49 dansmith: obviously 16:12:06 we are not putting into discussion your hard work 16:12:07 we're merging crazy amounts of code, and reviewing even more 16:12:31 btw thanks dansmith for the help on the WMIV2 one 16:12:51 at the moment, not even a single one of our Nova Bps got merged 16:12:55 honestly, the root cause here is how much was delivered right at the end of the cycle 16:13:02 (not just you, across the project) 16:13:09 review bandwidth doesn't magically increase at the end :-) 16:13:30 sure, but blueprints can be retargetted 16:13:41 hm? 16:13:53 for example by knowing the situation before we could have decided to move stuff to I 16:14:10 instead of running aroung on a gazillion reviews and blueprints for nothing 16:14:14 the blueprint list for h3 has been insane since mid-cycle 16:14:23 and i sent multiple messages to the ML about this 16:14:28 and brought it up many times in weekly meetings 16:14:29 is there an thought that some of the code may have to move to I if the backlog is not resolved? 16:14:32 well, somebody approved them 16:14:46 zehicle_at_dell: yes, whatever doesn't make it will move out 16:15:01 alexpilotti: an approval isn't a guarantee that it will make it 16:15:04 so russellb, what is the realistically expectation for our stuff? 16:15:18 hopefully we can get your most important stuff, some of it probably won't make it 16:15:28 due to being caught up with so many other things late in the dev cycle 16:15:45 i get that your v2 API stuff is important for platform support 16:15:56 russellb: is there possibilities of the others making it as a feature freeze exception? 16:15:56 the others seem less likely 16:16:06 you can apply 16:16:16 will have to sort through how many applications there are 16:16:18 well WMI V2 is required for Nova to work on Hyper-V V2 16:16:22 understood 16:16:27 sorry, on Hyper-V 2012 R2 16:16:33 so that's a good candidate for an exception if it doesn't make it 16:16:47 russellb: unfortunately most of ours depend on that one 16:16:49 the small ceilometer patch is required for… Ceilometer 16:17:04 the rest is basically on cascade on the WMI V2 one 16:17:12 ok. 16:17:28 so we spent one month rebasing patches basically 16:17:50 the WMI V2 one has been put as "high" in Neutron, for example 16:18:03 while in Nova is just a "low" one among the rest 16:18:40 and the WMI V2 is is just to have Nova running on the new Hyper-V 16:18:55 I definitely understand the importance of that, 16:18:56 so basically, we risk to end up having 0 new features in Havana 16:19:09 i told you V2 is a good candidate for an exception 16:19:12 as I wouldn't count compatibility as a feature 16:19:13 i think that one can make it at least 16:19:17 well, ok. 16:19:24 then the lesson is don't deliver at the end of the cycle :-) 16:19:34 or you're at risk of this happening 16:19:36 July? 16:19:50 not V2, the others 16:20:12 but anyway 16:20:13 only a couple of them got in late (as in Aug 21th) 16:20:16 what would you like me to do? 16:20:31 exceptions would be great of course 16:20:43 all that stuff is simple 100% included in the driver 16:20:46 we'll cross that bridge after feature freeze, you're welcome to apply 16:20:51 only the API stuff it's outside 16:21:10 exceptions don't increase review bandwidth, and it has to be weighed against other stuff that also needs an exception, right? 16:21:39 dansmith: yeah, we'll have to wait to see what exception applications we get 16:21:40 if "welcome to apply" means getting ignored, I don't think it's too useful 16:21:56 I'll second that statement 16:21:58 i'm not able to give an answer without having the other applications in front of me 16:22:12 russellb: that's fair 16:22:13 just raging at me isn't going to help :-) 16:22:22 russellb: not trying to rage at anyone 16:22:27 I take offense at the suggestion that we'd ask you to apply just to ignore you 16:22:28 russellb: I'm not raging at you :-) 16:22:29 but i promise to review every application and give a response 16:22:31 russellb: just trying to find a resolution to our current situation 16:22:41 you both suggesting that i would ignore you is pretty frustrating 16:22:42 nor I think that you should become the scapegoat of this situation 16:22:50 i'm taking time out of one of the busiest days of the year to talk here 16:22:58 yet i'm ignoring? come on. 16:23:07 anyway, i hope we can review some of your stuff 16:23:12 definitely want to get V2 in for you 16:23:21 the rest, please apply for exceptions and we'll sort it out soon 16:23:23 thanks guys 16:23:27 * russellb goes back to reviewing 16:23:30 russellb: thank you for your time 16:23:31 add please the ceilometer one 16:23:46 russellb: the intent wasn't to offend 16:23:58 russellb: dansmith: sorry if we did 16:24:19 ok 16:24:29 well, back to the meeting 16:24:35 yep 16:24:36 so 16:24:47 what I fear is that we're gonna have a fork 16:25:04 all the stuff that won't make it, will go into our github repo 16:25:14 the installer will be based on that 16:25:22 not what i wanted 16:25:27 and the same will probably happen for the other hypervisors 16:25:45 I don't want this to happen 16:25:52 but I don't see any way out 16:26:25 let's wait a day or two, see where we stand then decide what needs a feature freeze request 16:26:40 and start that process 16:27:07 one day actually, as the freeze in on the 4th :-) 16:27:12 i have a long term concern, too. i don't think this was a case of late submissions. the process is overwhelmed. how does this get fixed in future releases... 'I' and beyond... i've followed the discussion about options, but there wasn't any resolution. 16:27:47 hanrahat: that's a discussion above this meeting 16:28:06 this is most likely going to be an issue next release too 16:28:21 and not just for us 16:29:28 the solution IMO is increasing the review bandwidth 16:29:43 we're preparing a guy for this work 16:29:49 to do our part 16:30:13 the other important part of the solution is not to approve so many blueprints 16:30:21 if you already know you cannot make it 16:30:53 and the last one is better communication with the blueprint owners 16:31:01 alexpilotti: i think there's always optisism that they will make it 16:31:39 sure, hope beer dies :-) 16:31:43 loool 16:31:49 damn autocorrector 16:31:51 haha 16:31:56 was wondering what that meant 16:31:59 meant "never" 16:32:16 I see this as a positive sign ;-) 16:32:22 me too 16:32:32 let's move on then 16:32:40 agree 16:32:42 only other thing i had was to talk puppet bits 16:32:46 but luis didn't make it today 16:33:05 so I'll hold off on that, as I still have much to get cought up on. 16:33:23 so one other thing 16:33:29 to discuss is live-migration 16:33:36 #topic live-migration 16:34:00 thanks primeministerp 16:34:08 alexpilotti: you had something to add to this 16:34:13 so there's a new cool feature added by vishy 16:34:24 which most probably won't make it 16:34:47 but as there was a chance to get a shot at it, we implemented it in Hyper-V anyway 16:34:57 great 16:35:05 live-migration is a "host" snapshot of a VM 16:35:16 basically, what we call snapshots in Hyper-V 16:35:35 the VM gets snapshotted, the image + memory dump uploaded in Glance 16:35:47 and from there you can spawn new images out of it 16:36:00 the advantage is that VM boot time is almost 0 16:36:00 so storing running state as an image 16:36:37 think about VDI, possibly in conjunction with RemoteFX 16:36:44 yep 16:36:54 very interesting use case for it 16:36:56 you can have running VDI images in a matter of 1-2 seconds 16:37:37 and since a differential disk is used also for the snapshot disks 16:37:47 disk image is tiny too 16:37:49 there's basically no disk usage 16:38:01 it's a great feature IMO 16:38:17 it will not make it for a single reason: 16:38:25 being? 16:38:39 it's not ready in libvirt / qemu 16:38:48 ahh 16:38:49 as in the project, not the Nova driver 16:38:53 got it 16:39:01 while the APIs are perfectly working 16:39:30 but they don't want to merge them as there's no driver implementing it 16:39:49 that's why I gave a shot at it 16:40:01 fwiw guys, i'm going to have a design summit session on the general future of compute drivers in nova 16:40:02 good thinking 16:40:18 russellb: cool 16:40:38 russellb: great, i'm hoping to have team there, I'll make sure it's on the required viewing list 16:40:40 russellb: since you are around, no chance I guess for the live-snapshot apis? 16:41:02 no 16:41:42 alexpilotti: do we have anything else to discuss 16:41:43 russellb: lol, I had to ask but I didn't have big hopes :-) 16:42:03 primeministerp: yes, the positive news, aka what merged: 16:42:10 alexpilotti: go for it 16:42:23 pnavarro's Cinder patch merged (yeiii) 16:42:31 tx pnavarro! :-) 16:42:37 alexpilotti: yes he brough me up to speed on that this morning 16:42:43 thanks again pnavarro ! 16:42:47 ceilometer merged 16:42:52 also great news 16:43:02 Neutron Hyper-V V2 merged 16:43:16 a bunch of bug fixes 16:43:30 and a bunch of Nova pieces 16:43:43 none of them make an entire blueprint unfortunately yet 16:43:53 gotcha 16:44:05 johnthetubaguy was incredibly helpful yesterday and today in helping out with WMI V2 16:44:25 johnthetubaguy: thanks for the help! 16:44:26 so we have one +2 to go for having this feature merged 16:44:47 and basically this is it 16:44:50 no worries, happy to help out 16:44:52 let me know when we're ready to talk on the Crowbar HyperV progress 16:45:02 zehicle_at_dell: we can add that as a topic as well 16:45:05 let's do it now 16:45:07 thanks 16:45:12 #topic crowbar/hyper-v 16:45:15 zehicle_at_dell: sure 16:45:28 zehicle_at_dell: the floor is yours 16:45:52 There are a lot of pull requests in the queue for HyperV support 16:46:46 zehicle_at_dell: you mean our requests or pulls on our barclamp? 16:46:57 both 16:47:15 it looks like they are going to settle pretty soon 16:47:24 and we're ready to branch and start the havana work in ernest 16:47:36 ok 16:48:22 we merged lately some pulls on the Hyper-V barclamp 16:48:26 great! 16:48:32 hy all, sorry for being late 16:48:40 basically in the day we got them, afaik 16:48:44 for Havana, we'll use PFS 16:49:11 so, we should be able to bring in the code even if it has not been through review & into trunk 16:49:11 ociuhandu: do you have some more details on the pulls on the Hyper-V barclamp? 16:49:39 that's part of the goal - I think it would be easier to get reviews if you'd been able to show integratation 16:50:14 yes, we have only 2 left, one for SSL and one that's from today, some code cleanuo 16:50:15 integration? as in having a CI framework in place? 16:51:04 alexpilotti: was that for me? 16:51:10 alexpilotti: that last question? 16:51:19 no, for zehicle_at_dell 16:52:01 zehicle_at_dell: ping 16:52:12 sorry 16:52:23 np! 16:52:56 our primary goal has been to make sure they are not breaking other stuff 16:53:28 we have people who shoudl be able to do that - I'll get them connected to you 16:53:53 that's grizzly target' 16:54:06 but I'm interested in migrating that work to Havana soon 16:54:18 because I think it will be easier to make adjstments and fast feedback 16:54:54 ok, that's not too complicated for us 16:54:58 so, expect a branch where we can work on Havana. then we can target the hyperv code to your github 16:55:10 ok 16:55:13 zehicle_at_dell: perfect 16:55:22 the key is that I want to align our internal tests, they need to be able to get a workable build 16:55:32 because they are not in a position to integtrate directly from the code 16:55:39 one question: let's say that some of the Havana stuff under review does not make it for Havana 16:55:48 do we still include it in Crowbar? 16:55:53 yes 16:55:59 good 16:56:10 I agree to that statement 16:56:15 we do that for advanced features, it's one of the reasons that we use PFS 16:56:21 because sometimes, you're working ahead of trunk 16:56:25 (esp w/ these backlogs) 16:57:01 IMHO, if we can show it's working against trunk on a multi-node system then it should be easier to get reviews to flow 16:57:13 zehicle_at_dell: agreed 16:57:45 ok guys we're coming to the end of our time 16:57:59 zehicle_at_dell (and primeministerp) how do you plan to organise the testing? 16:57:59 I know that there's a balance between the Grizzly work that's trying to land and getting Havana integrations 16:58:24 alexpilotti: that's still under discussion right now 16:58:28 I've been waiting for a green light from you that we've got a usable build 16:58:40 and then have that team work 1x1 so that they can replicate your environemtn 16:58:54 first, they'll baseline that build w/ the defaults 16:59:10 and then add in the HyperV parts in collabroation w/ you 16:59:29 I'm expecting that we'll create a doc in the process so the community can replicate the process 16:59:47 cool 16:59:53 zehicle_at_dell: sounds great 16:59:54 originally, I'd thought to do that w/ grizzly bits but I think we may want to consider Hanava 16:59:55 zehicle_at_dell: ideally we'll be able to share our test plans/cases as well 17:00:00 whioch would be more helpful? 17:00:24 zehicle_at_dell: probably havana 17:00:30 primeministerp: yes, that makes sense 17:00:47 +1 on Havana. We just have to get the baseline set 17:00:54 ok, we're out of time. this was helpful. Thanks 17:01:03 ok guys, let's free up the channel, we can continue the discussion int he hyper-v channel if necessary 17:01:09 thanks everyone 17:01:15 #endmeeting