14:01:09 #startmeeting nova-scheduler 14:01:10 Meeting started Mon Aug 3 14:01:09 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is n0ano. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:01:11 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:01:13 The meeting name has been set to 'nova_scheduler' 14:01:27 anyone here to talk about the scheduler (other than early bird lxsli :-) 14:01:36 o/ 14:02:16 o/ 14:02:52 #topic Liberty specs 14:03:30 So, I've noticed that bauzas_off patch https://review.openstack.org/199205 is failing for no good reason and I've hit it with a recheck a couple of times and it's still failing 14:03:50 do I just keep doing rechecks until the gate decides to work or is there something else going on? 14:04:26 n0ano: no. 14:04:48 n0ano: the failures are in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/188487/ 14:04:59 n0ano: which is WAY up in the dependent patch chain. 14:05:41 n0ano: basically, we all need to do reviews of the whole patch series, starting from the beginning one: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/145528/38 14:06:35 jaypipes, ah, I didn't realize the whole chain was in flight 14:07:04 reviewing the whole chain is good but bauzas_off won't be back for a week which is unforutnate 14:07:55 n0ano: we can always push new patches to fix the test failures 14:07:57 n0ano: sure, but we can provide feedback. 14:08:15 that too :) 14:08:53 So anyone want to discuss Liberty Specs? 14:09:23 lxsli, kind of what we were doing (these are the patches that implement the specs), what were you concerned about? 14:10:27 btw, Mitaka is open for specs, if that helps anyone 14:11:01 johnthetubaguy, tnx, good to know, we should be proposing a few 14:11:30 i need to send quite a few ML mails, thats on my TODO, once this freeze is under control 14:12:12 johnthetubaguy, with great power comes great responsibility :-) 14:12:15 n0ano: we just seemed to be off-topic and furthermore to have wound down 14:12:55 n0ano: I'm unsure check-migr-dest will make it given bauzas_off is off and I also depend on alaski's patches that he hasn't written yet 14:13:01 lxsli, the reality is I've been loose with terminology, the important specs for Liberty are approved so the real discussion is on the patches 14:13:56 lxsli, is that spec on the priority page? That's what I've been using for tracking 14:15:38 lxsli, have you talked to alaski to see how close he is on his patches? 14:15:39 uh, the spec is merged to Liberty 14:15:56 not yet I can do that 14:16:12 lxsli, so, no problem on the spec, but we do need to track it's patches 14:17:26 lxsli, can you write preliminary code based upon what alaski should do and then update it when he actually has his implmentation? 14:17:42 n0ano: I'm having a go but necessarily that's vague 14:17:58 I guess I primarily need to sync with alaski, let's move on 14:18:19 lxsli, I feel your pain but that's the nature of dependencies 14:18:30 OK, anything else on the current specs/patches? 14:18:57 On resource-objects, I hope to sync with Jay today to resolve the "last" question 14:19:20 lxsli, jaypipes is right here, you want to sync right now? 14:19:51 during meeting time? 14:20:01 if it 14:20:13 I can't promise it'll be short :) 14:20:32 lxsli, let's do it at the end then, we should finish here soon. 14:20:41 lxsli: last I checked, ndipanov was negative on the final patch in the series because he wanted to see it used in followup code. 14:21:47 jaypipes: I heard that but as a +0 14:22:13 jaypipes: my question is around whether #consume needs to call numa_fit_instance_to_host 14:22:15 lxsli: I have a patch series I will be pushing shortly that refactors unit tests to use mock instead of mox (and not rely on DB in unit tests). I noticed that any time i change the resource tracker, a metric shit-ton of unit tests fail. So, I was hoping to refactor these tests to prevent a giant 5000LOC patch. 14:23:08 lxsli: I thought we chatted about that last wednesday... yes, I think it should use numa_fit_instance_to_host. I need to update that patch. 14:23:42 jaypipes: OK, didn't catch your agreement. Thanks! 14:24:06 lxsli, so this was short after all? 14:24:11 lxsli: no worries, man. I was in and out of eleventy billion meetings that day. 14:24:18 as it turns out I didn't have to bully Jay hardly at all! 14:24:50 hehe 14:24:55 * n0ano bummer, watching bullying on someone else is fun 14:24:59 anywy 14:25:08 #expose host capabilities 14:25:33 so, eventually, I did send out an email late last night, I want to start a discussion... 14:25:51 my hope is to gather ideas on the problem space before we dive into a solution... 14:26:03 would love to hear people's thoughts on the ML 14:26:42 n0ano: yes, I owe you a response on that. 14:27:09 jaypipes, slacker, you've literally had from midnight to 6AM to do that :-) 14:27:21 :) 14:28:00 jaypipes, no I wasn't negative 14:28:09 I just said it would be nice to see it in action 14:28:17 hopefully we can talk about this subject in more detail at the next meeting when everyone has a chance to think about it 14:28:25 #topic opens 14:28:27 and +1ed it iirc 14:28:49 anyone have anything new today? 14:29:43 *crickets* 14:29:51 I'm hearing the dreaded sound of crickets 14:29:55 n0ano: http://www.memes.com/img/510571 14:30:23 run away, puppy pics 14:30:34 jaypipes: I felt bad about bugging you for a good half-minute after you posted that 14:30:47 lxsli: :) I just love that pic. 14:31:02 tnx everyone, back to reviewing and we'll talk next week 14:31:17 #endmeeting