19:01:03 #startmeeting infra 19:01:03 #link agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/InfraTeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting 19:01:03 #link previous meeting http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2015/infra.2015-06-23-19.02.html 19:01:03 Meeting started Tue Jun 30 19:01:03 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is jeblair. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:01:04 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 19:01:07 The meeting name has been set to 'infra' 19:01:08 o/ 19:01:09 o/ 19:01:21 #topic Announcements 19:01:30 #info adding asselin to puppet-openstackci-core 19:01:44 o/ 19:01:45 yay! 19:01:51 woo :) 19:01:52 /clap 19:01:57 o/ 19:02:10 asselin: thanks for volunteering for this burden 19:02:22 i'll do that real soon now, and hopefully we'll be able to add some more folks soon too 19:02:27 i know there's interest 19:02:44 #topic Specs approval 19:02:51 #topic Specs approval: RefStack Site Hosting (hogepodge, davidlenwell) 19:02:56 #link refstack site hosting spec http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/refstack_dot_org.html 19:02:59 #info refstack site hosting spec was approved 19:03:03 o/ 19:03:08 o/ 19:03:26 i've been more terrible than usual about finding time to review these, so thanks to everyone else who did and picked up my slack 19:04:03 thanks everyone for approving refstack 19:04:25 Happy to help with the deployment. 19:04:34 hogepodge: i'll hold you to that ;) 19:04:50 \o/ 19:05:00 anything else we should cover on this? 19:05:39 I have 1, but can wait until open discussion 19:06:08 pabelanger: we don't have a huge agenda today, go for it 19:06:10 o/ 19:06:50 So, I created a spec to host the trystack.org since under -infra. The static content of the web site, not the openstack bits: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/195098/ 19:07:14 pabelanger: oh, i thought you had a refstack thing 19:07:15 So far, a team member at RedHat is open to the idea of moving it into trystack.o.o 19:07:22 jeblair, no, something new 19:07:31 sorry, if I was unclear 19:07:34 sounds like a separate meeting topic 19:07:41 yeah, let's move on 19:07:43 roger 19:07:46 #topic Priority Efforts (Migration to Zanata) 19:07:58 we had some action items from last time 19:08:02 jeblair set up translate@o.o infra-root alias 19:08:04 i did that 19:08:07 pleia2 sign up translate@ openstackid account 19:08:23 the account is created on openstackid 19:08:29 er, except i think i called it 'zanata' 19:08:34 which i think is the better choice 19:08:37 yeah 19:08:49 and then: 19:08:49 fungi mrmartin pleia2 investigate "admin interface" for openstack id, get service account group assigned somehow 19:08:57 anything come of that? 19:09:05 zanata was pointed at openstackid-dev though, so a patch merged this morning to have zanata use that, so soon I can set up the zanata account itself 19:09:07 yeah, that definitely didn't happen on my part 19:09:13 not yet 19:09:14 i still need to ask around about that 19:09:19 not yet, we need to check it 19:09:26 #action fungi mrmartin pleia2 investigate "admin interface" for openstack id, get service account group assigned somehow 19:09:26 not a big deal, need to allocate time 19:09:30 thanks mrmartin, let me know what you need 19:09:35 time 19:09:37 :) 19:09:43 :) 19:09:43 *from me 19:09:46 * fungi knows that feeling 19:10:32 See discussion on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187867/ need infra input on translation-projects.txt vs. changes to projects.yaml 19:10:44 we also have that in the meeting agenda ^ 19:11:09 yep, this is a result of a chat between AJaeger and StevenK over (my) night 19:11:17 I summarized it in the review, need input from others 19:11:47 do we want to create a new translation-projects.txt file in project-config, or can we ad a translate: true stanza to projects.yaml to add projects to zanata 19:11:54 s/ad/add 19:12:10 ah, yeah, i think despite appearances to the contrary, we actually don't want to have tons of files named "projects.yaml" so i like (b) 19:12:13 * AJaeger would love not to have an admin go into Zanata and manually set up a new project 19:12:23 either way, good news is we can now add projects via code review, not through the translations web API like we do with transifex now :) 19:12:29 AJaeger ++ 19:12:30 AJaeger: yeah, that's definitely the goal 19:12:30 we've added fields to gerrit/projects.yaml for non-gerrit-specific aspects which are still repo-relative 19:12:43 s/API/UI 19:12:45 phew 19:13:27 it's mostly for stuff driven from jeepyb, but i don't think it has to be _just_ that 19:13:34 * pleia2 nods 19:13:40 pleia2: Zanata operation could also be done via puppet 19:13:50 for example, storyboard was consuming that directly for creating project-groups 19:13:54 AJaeger: yeah, exciting times :) 19:14:04 i'd say we have consensus on b, unless there are objections? 19:14:11 wfm 19:14:28 Sgtm 19:14:38 I'll let StevenK know and we'll work on the required changes elsewhere to support it 19:14:39 whatever works ;) 19:14:47 thanks, pleia2 19:14:56 any other zanata items? 19:15:12 we're handing it off to Daisy this week, and opening testing to the broader community next week 19:15:18 so, yay :) 19:15:19 that's all 19:15:20 awesome! 19:15:52 #topic trystack web site hosting (pabelanger) 19:15:57 okay, late addition! :) 19:16:16 ha, ya sorry. Was going to bring it up in open discussion 19:16:46 either way, I think there is a good chance to move trystack.org under -infra if people are open to it. Not the openstack bits, just the static contents of the website 19:16:49 spec is up 19:16:54 and puppet bits working too 19:17:26 the spec: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/195098/ 19:17:47 I assume we'd get the people managing the site now, and openstack foundation board to chime in on the move 19:17:52 that seems like relatively low-hanging fruit we should knock out if all parties are in agreement. thanks! 19:18:05 is it a truly static website? 19:18:12 SpamapS, yup 19:18:18 is there any reason thats not just in swift then? 19:18:28 the openstack service bits of that (and the embarrassing facebook groups auth model it's reliant on for the moment) will be a tougher nut to crack 19:18:32 SpamapS, https://github.com/trystack/trystack_org_webcontents 19:18:39 the plan would be to move that in to -infra too 19:19:03 yeah, i think getting the web site hosted is a good first step to make it more of a community effort 19:19:30 i don't want us to get involved in running the site yet, but after we have infra-cloud up and running for a while, i think we will be in a position to start talking abotu that 19:19:57 sorry, by that last, i mean running the actual openstack service 19:20:18 we should handle this the same way, as we are doing for openstackid, group, and maybe o.o, typical web projects 19:20:26 and ask.o.o 19:20:31 mrmartin: handle what? 19:20:39 there's still a large unknown around that piece, which is self-service sign-up/single-sign-on for keystone 19:20:41 trystack.o.o website 19:21:04 mrmartin: as a static site it's actualy a bit simpler and does not need its own server, but yes, in general 19:21:10 mrmartin: well, the trystack website is just static content (docs) 19:21:12 yeah, but self-service signup is a solvable part, if we have some spec / doc for that 19:21:25 * SpamapS feels like we got off track? 19:21:33 yep 19:21:49 two different problems to solve. the easy one is the trystack.org static content website. that's our topic 19:22:44 Yes, right now the site is mostly unmanaged, and it would be fairly painless to move it into the -infra domain to start monitoring / managing it 19:22:56 any other changes to login or servers, would need more detailed specs 19:23:00 SpamapS: i suppose we could put it in swift; we don't really have a generalized 'host a static site in swift' model. even the proposed docs publishing change has problems with that model that are hard to overcome. 19:23:42 whereas, apache vhost is fairly common and easy 19:23:42 i'm not opposed to someone solving that challenge, but we do already have virtual machines which can use apache to serve local files 19:24:24 if anyone is interested in the problems, see http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/doc-publishing.html 19:24:51 at least, i hope we captured the issues in there :) 19:24:53 mrmartin, this is what it would look like if we imported today: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/194816/ 19:24:54 our uploading/serving job logs in swift and the os-loganalyze project is a good example of how that gets pretty complicated quickly 19:25:05 jeblair: I think thats fine in each narrow case. From a broader view, one has to wonder why it isn't easier to use swift for its exact intended purpose though. 19:25:24 sorry SpamapS ^ 19:25:35 SpamapS: yeah, we provide feedback to swift folks for sure 19:25:48 SpamapS: part of it comes down to how different service providers choose to set up their swift services too 19:25:59 fungi: bingo 19:26:04 SpamapS: our use case is arguably not its exact intended purpose; it gets into splitting hairs too. 19:26:47 anyway, hope that provides some background :) 19:27:00 pabelanger: thanks for kicking that off 19:27:13 #topic Open discussion 19:27:15 jeblair, np 19:27:21 jeblair: totally, I don't want to discuss any details, however I do want to register my strong belief that the general direction I think we should take is to push things toward static hosting being done in swift in general. I understand that is easy to say, and not easy to do. :) 19:27:43 Same reason we use Trove right? :) 19:28:00 SpamapS: so you suggest to move all static content into swift? 19:28:03 SpamapS: which has also not been a resounding success 19:28:24 o/ 19:28:29 Anyway, regarding infra-cloud, just a general status update: On the test node I have ironic,keystone,nuetron, and glance working. Nova is installed, but nova-api refuses to respond with anything other than 404's for all requests. 19:28:37 mrmartin: absolutely. 19:28:42 SpamapS: w00t 19:28:58 mrmartin: the fact that there is any friction to that is a sign that investment is needed at any of those friction points. 19:29:02 So, I managed to find the issue with our puppet-apply-centos6 gate job. It looks to be an issue within the git client (1.7). Moving to 1.8 fixes the performance issue (30+mins down to 4mins). 19:29:13 For the most part, i did a JJB that upgrades git inline: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/196761/ 19:29:18 would be curious to get some feedback 19:29:24 thanks pabelanger 19:29:38 mrmartin: long term it should result in having less resources to manage, and more scalability. 19:29:42 SpamapS: please understand that this thought has occurred to us 19:29:57 jeblair: I'm certain it has. I want to make sure we keep looping back to it. 19:29:59 pabelanger: were you able to figure out whether a glibc change or similar earlier this year on centos 6 is what caused that to suddenly start happening for us? 19:30:00 SpamapS: the shortest path is going with static.o.o for trystack but in middleterm I can imagine some efforts to move static content to swift 19:30:14 jeblair: perhaps those with more historical context are more weary than I? ;) 19:30:27 fungi, no, I didn't get that far. I wanted to first try a newer client to see if it was affected too. 19:30:34 SpamapS: i hope you will find some of that in the spec i linked 19:30:54 fungi, I was going to look into the 1.8 branch and see if I could find a commit that addressed the problem 19:31:02 jeblair: I did, thank you. :) (I've also been trying to withdraw from this point for about 10 minutes now... ;) 19:31:34 k, let's talk about centos6 git 19:31:47 istr we tried to use git:// on centos6 jobs for a similar problem in the past... 19:31:55 does that still help things? did that regress? 19:31:56 SpamapS: put down the swift and back away slowly ;) 19:33:09 jeblair, I tried git:// and http:// for URI's there was an improvement but still some delay 19:33:31 Open discussion, I spun up a phabricator instance to play a bit with CustomFields 19:33:32 https was the biggest hit to performance 19:33:45 will play tomorrow 19:34:33 jeblair, at the end of the day, upgrading git yielded the same performance as ubuntu hosts 19:34:45 I never could get centos6 down to 5min mark using different URIs 19:35:06 pabelanger: so we can fix this with newer git on centos, or potentially finding the underlying thing on centos that changed (eg, glibc?) 19:35:15 right 19:35:23 or we can stop using centos6 and move to centos7 19:35:26 perhaps 19:35:31 yes, that was another thought 19:35:41 I was looking this morning what centos6 we had for -infra and puppet 19:35:45 i didn't see much 19:35:58 i suspect we can upgrade infra fairly easily 19:36:01 I was talking to fungi about bare-centos7 image and such 19:36:11 the question is what test jobs need centos6 19:36:28 I could get a list together for that 19:37:11 worrisome is that if we upgrade our git servers to centos 7 we may stop supporting shallow clones 19:37:24 is git there as new as on ubuntu trusty? 19:38:22 unsure for me 19:39:08 it's not clear that the git authors want to support that, so... 19:40:05 i'd be okay with declaring that we don't support shallow clones from our git server farm, but not sure who might rebel over that 19:40:23 they can rebel all they want - we can't run centos6 for forever 19:40:30 we can point them at the git bug 19:40:33 ++ 19:40:39 maybe a friend somewhere will fix it 19:41:11 great point 19:41:38 so i think the ideal solutions would be: 1) underlying centos6 bug is fixed; 2) centos6 upgrades git; 3) we remove our use of centos6; 4) we self-upgrade git on our centos6 images 19:41:48 in order of preference ^ 19:41:49 yeah? 19:42:33 That would be best case IMO 19:43:46 pabelanger: thanks for digging into it 19:43:52 np 19:44:06 ttx: cool, good luck! 19:44:30 jeblair: I think I'll killfile that OOO from mpstor.com dude 19:44:49 that hasn't happened yet? 19:45:02 ttx: thank you :) 19:45:05 jeblair: I assumed it was, but they keep on coming 19:45:37 btw if someone wants to volunteer to help on -dev I'll take it as a co-admin 19:46:41 hmm, he isn't subscribed (or not subscribed anymore) 19:47:13 ttx: let us know if we need to dig into logs or something 19:47:37 Hi, I'd like to remind people of the common-ci virtual sprint next week (July 8-9): Sign up here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/common-ci-sprint 19:48:13 ttx: I think its on -anounce 19:48:16 hey look new signups! 19:48:20 #link common-ci virtual sprint https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/common-ci-sprint 19:48:37 (remember we set -anounce to reply to -dev) 19:49:34 jeblair: ok, I got it. He is subscribed to openstack@lists.o.o and there is a whitelist on -dev for senders from that list 19:49:48 ah 19:49:52 two options. Disable the whitelist or remove him from openstack list 19:50:28 i think removing from openstack makes the most sense 19:50:43 (i think adding him to a blacklist is a 3rd option, but also probably not the best) 19:50:47 or I can add him to reject_these_nonmembers but no idea what takes precedence 19:51:03 easier that he resubscribes when back from vacation. 19:51:20 If I could find the guy who invented out of office notices 19:51:28 I'd make him SUFFER 19:52:01 ttx: redirect all ooo notices to them 19:52:14 you could only make him suffer after he gets back in the office 19:52:38 ok, for the record he was unsubbed. 19:52:55 http://lists-archives.com/git/843412-setup_temporary_shallow-use-tempfile-module.html looks promising 19:53:46 oh good there' hope 19:54:05 yeah, i think they're still deciding how to solve it and less whether to solve it 19:55:06 anything else or should we wrap up? 19:56:11 thanks all! 19:56:14 #endmeeting