07:00:10 #startmeeting swift 07:00:11 Meeting started Wed May 31 07:00:10 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mahatic. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 07:00:12 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 07:00:15 The meeting name has been set to 'swift' 07:00:33 who is here for Swift alternate meeting? 07:00:42 o/ 07:00:43 Yay, Swift time :) Hello everyone! 07:00:45 o/ 07:00:46 good morning 07:00:52 * notmyname here, although disagrees with "alternate" ;-) 07:01:01 :D 07:01:15 Did I see acoles too? 07:01:15 thanks, mahatic, for leading this meeting 07:01:24 I'm here! 07:01:24 So weird to have it at this time, but also great :) 07:01:35 hello 07:01:36 notmyname: of course np! 07:01:42 hello everyone! 07:01:43 hi 07:01:47 great to see you all 07:01:56 let's get started 07:02:12 #topic Rotating Chair 07:02:42 So, it'd be really great and helpful if we could have rotating Chairs 07:02:54 I have one :) 07:03:00 * mattoliverau imagines mahatic on a swivel chair leading the meeting 07:03:55 Part of the reason is, currently I'm not 100% on Swift and also involved in other projects at my work 07:04:09 all those jokes, note the capitalization of C ;) 07:04:10 mahatic: ok, but so far your doing great :) 07:04:19 Fair enough. 07:04:19 maybe rotate alphabetically? so it's (nearly) clear who's next and who has been the last one (eg acoles, cschwede, kota, mahatic, mathiasb, mattoliverau, and so on...) 07:04:47 getting back, it'd make sense we have different Chairs especially to avoid times when one of is not caught up enough on what's going on 07:05:02 cschwede_: I see what you did to me there ;) 07:05:16 cschwede_: sounds great to me 07:05:20 acoles: ;) 07:05:34 acoles: pure coincidence :) 07:05:40 So long as it's written somewhere (on the ajenda/wiki) cause I'll forget :) 07:05:44 But sure 07:05:51 mahatic: ok with me 07:06:07 Is everyone else ok with having Chairs, in the alphabetical order? 07:06:14 acoles: great, thanks 07:06:19 let's do that! 07:06:21 +1 07:06:28 +1 07:06:34 +1 07:06:46 I think I saw that rledisez may be attending, so add him to list? 07:06:55 Yup ;) 07:07:03 yes sure 07:07:13 yeah, my list is surely not complete... 07:07:22 And clayg *promised* he'd be here!! 07:07:28 seems a lot of us agree on that. Nice! 07:07:37 he specifically said he wouldn't be here, today in the office :-) 07:07:41 yes, clayg: where are you?! ;) 07:08:08 i'm not sure i'm ever caught up enough on what's going on, but if that's not a strict requirement then sure, +1 :) 07:08:08 thank you everyone for agreeing on being a Chair! 07:08:38 mathiasb: oh well, you *can* get caught up if you aren't already, no? ;) 07:08:49 mathiasb, it's should be just leading and going through what's on the ajenda 07:09:22 +1 also preparing the agenda as well 07:09:25 And getting us back into line when we get too off track ;) 07:09:34 mathiasb: everyone - i think it's important that the Chair does not fee they need to know everything that is going on - I see the role as facilitating 07:09:45 s/fee/feel/ 07:10:02 Yeah, let's all try and help with the ajenda 07:10:04 I agree 07:10:36 Start with some common topics, then people can add if they need/want to discuss 07:10:59 I would be very happy to assist anyone with that 07:11:19 and am available to do so at whatever time is convenient for you 07:11:28 I was just about to say that - you can coordinate with notmyname in any case :) 07:11:38 notmyname: thanks! 07:12:07 any more questions/thoughts on this? 07:12:18 so for practical todos, acoles will chair the next meeting on June 14? 07:12:30 Kk 07:13:08 Yup 07:13:31 notmyname: should this be a hashtag todo you mean? 07:14:17 yes, it can be, but that's not what I meant by the statement/question 07:14:27 okay 07:14:34 I'll probably just note it in the wiki 07:14:46 next up 07:14:49 #agreed chairs for 0700 meeting will rotate 07:14:59 #agreed acoles will chair june 14 07:15:12 done :-) 07:15:20 thanks! :) 07:15:26 #topic Priority review patches that didn't have a turnaround in over a month 07:15:55 so as the title suggests, I noted a few of those patches 07:16:00 s/noted/noticed 07:16:10 notmyname: perhaps the hashtag commands are only for the chiar? 07:16:16 chair 07:16:35 kota_: dunno 07:16:48 #agreed chairs for 0700 meeting will rotate 07:17:07 hmm that didn't prompt anything 07:17:14 hmm... 07:17:19 getting back - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289664/ 07:17:49 oh hi! 07:18:04 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289664/ 07:18:05 patch 289664 - swift - Make eventlet.tpool's thread count configurable in... 07:18:14 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289664/ 07:18:14 patch 289664 - swift - Make eventlet.tpool's thread count configurable in... 07:18:15 that one is Sam's patch and Clay seems to have left a -1. There hasn't been any activity in more than a month 07:18:23 thank you kota_ notmyname 07:19:06 Oh I had problems, getting it to work when testing this 07:19:21 Been meaning to retry 07:19:37 oh okay 07:19:41 I'm not sure if Sam is still intending to work on it? 07:20:06 notmyname: would you know? 07:20:14 he's not, in the short term 07:20:47 or rather, that's not what he's currently working on day-to-day 07:20:59 well, since it's in the priority reviews, maybe anyone else who has bandwidth and interest could pick it up 07:21:05 Maybe it shouldn't be a priority review, it's cool, so stay a patch 07:21:15 there's more info in the bug report https://bugs.launchpad.net/swift/+bug/1554233 07:21:16 Launchpad bug 1554233 in OpenStack Object Storage (swift) "Servers-per-port can consume excessive OS threads" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Samuel Merritt (torgomatic) 07:21:39 mattoliverau: a bug doesn't get less-bad when someone is unavailable to work on a patch ;-) 07:21:48 just means the rest of us have to step up :-) 07:21:51 Lol true 07:21:58 lol 07:21:59 yeah, clayg's comments seem to be rather easy to include, maybe someone wants to step in on this patch? 07:22:19 maybe Clay! ;) 07:22:32 notmyname: right, but it would be helpful in such a case to know that the patch needs someone to take it on. otherwise it just clutters the priority review list but is in fact going nowhere 07:22:37 i assume Sam would be ok if someone takes over as long as the author tag is kept 07:22:38 on a serious note, maybe someone who already has context - that's what I meant 07:23:15 yes, acoles and mahatic. that is very true 07:23:21 So do we need a "priority reviews in need of an owner" list? 07:23:35 Prashanth liked the patch, maybe he has some interest in this. I'll ping him 07:23:48 is he still around? 07:24:33 I'm not sure how great or long my promises can last in my current situation. But I can loop round on it seeing as I was testing it in the past. 07:24:56 acoles: looks like it. at least if we have bugs/patches that are a priority but doesn't have an owner, having a list would help and bring some visibility 07:24:57 I think what we need on this patch is for someone to spend a bit of time to understand it, especially since it may need to be taken over from torgomatic 07:25:23 ...and it sounds like mattoliverau can take a stab at that? 07:25:40 Yup 07:26:00 great, thanks 07:26:11 and a fallback would be Prashanth if he's interested? 07:26:15 mattoliverau: and even working in clay's comment and pushing another patch set would be good 07:26:28 mahatic: if he's still working on swift... 07:26:35 Kk 07:26:51 oic okay 07:27:05 thanks mattoliverau! 07:27:34 the other patch is 07:27:34 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/371150/ 07:27:35 patch 371150 - swift - Return 404 on a GET if tombstone is newer 07:28:33 this one has also been for quite sometime with no activity. Could check with tdasilva if he's still planning on continuing with that work 07:28:39 this one looks like it's been a conversation between timburke and tdasilva 07:28:58 yes, this one needs to be brought up in the 2100 meeting later today 07:29:14 looks like a useful improvement 07:30:07 yeah, I'm sure it'd be useful. It's tagged as medium priority 07:30:28 okay, we have one more and Romain is the author. But he doesn't seem to be around 07:30:36 hi everybody :) 07:30:45 rledisez: oh hi! :) 07:30:55 welcome 07:31:06 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/456921/ has everyone here right now :-) 07:31:07 patch 456921 - swift - Fix SSYNC failing to replicate unexpired object 07:31:24 mattoliverau left a comment and acoles seems to have addressed it 07:31:30 mattoliverau: did you get a chance to look over it? 07:31:37 rledisez: o/ 07:31:39 notmyname: yes, thanks! :) 07:32:09 Not yet, been distracted 07:32:23 mattoliverau: i think alister answered your concerns about commit/verify 07:32:29 *acoles 07:32:50 Kk, will take a look, sorry everyone 07:32:59 mattoliverau: yeah, it is a little subtle but the verify flag is distinct from commit 07:33:01 mattoliverau: no worries. you've been upended recently 07:33:38 mattoliverau: what would be best here (for you)? take it from rledisez an acoles that it's resolves? wait for you to respond in gerrit? 07:34:00 get another person involved in the review? 07:34:49 notmyname: clayg spent some time on this - IIRC I ripped off a probe test he started in the follow up, so he may be able to jump in 07:34:53 I'll take a quick look tomorrow 07:35:05 But if need be don't wait for me 07:35:35 But I do trust them :) 07:36:26 ah, ok. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/460073/ is the follow-up 07:36:27 patch 460073 - swift - Add probe test for ssync of unexpired metadata to ... 07:36:36 acoles: maybe that should be merged in? 07:37:03 mattoliverau: ok, if you take a look tomorrow, that would be great. but if not, that's ok, but just let us know :-) 07:37:23 ok, that sounds good 07:38:25 thanks everyone for figuring it out :) 07:38:31 next up is 07:38:35 #topic Drop translation that's causing bugs 07:38:39 I will, I'll leave a comment if I have issues or fail to test on my limited resources 07:39:03 notmyname: +1 (squash the probe test) it's 'only' another 58 lines to review 07:39:23 :-) 07:39:32 so we have a couple of bugs on this (maybe more around) 07:39:35 https://bugs.launchpad.net/swift/+bug/1648082 07:39:36 Launchpad bug 1648082 in OpenStack Object Storage (swift) "Yet UnicodeDecodeError: 'ascii' codec can't decode byte..." [Undecided,New] 07:39:41 https://bugs.launchpad.net/swift/+bug/1580678 07:39:42 Launchpad bug 1580678 in OpenStack Object Storage (swift) "UnicodeDecodeError when rebalancing a ring" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Christian Schwede (cschwede) 07:40:41 on the latter, clayg commented that openstack had a resolution to drop off log message translations 07:40:51 +1! 07:40:59 and here is what info I could find on that - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LoggingStandards#Log_Translation 07:41:28 but it doesn't quite say the same. If anyone could point to a better source, that'd be great 07:41:55 or if I'm missing some ML announcement on this, please correct me 07:41:56 if you ever google a translated log message, your chance is pretty low to find something useful... 07:42:13 here 07:42:14 https://docs.openstack.org/developer/oslo.i18n/guidelines.html#log-translation 07:42:33 " Starting with the Pike series, OpenStack no longer supports log translation. It is not necessary to add translation instructions to new code, and the instructions can be removed from old code. Refer to the email thread understanding log domain change on the openstack-dev mailing list for more details." 07:42:35 awesome, thanks notmyname 07:42:39 http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-March/thread.html#113365 07:42:45 IMO that's not helpful for operators, and AFAICT many don't run this in a translated language therefore (true for other software as well) 07:43:07 so we're getting rid of this? 07:43:17 yup! 07:43:21 cschwede_: if you're saying that translated logs aren't helpful I completely agree 07:43:22 could be a nice low-hanging-fruit 07:43:33 notmyname: that's what i wanted to say! :) 07:43:38 (I acknowledge that the logs [and everything else] are in my native language, though) 07:44:32 so from the links above it seems very clear that we can remove translations from log messages 07:44:50 cschwede_: does that help make progess on these open bugs (you'd been working on at least one) 07:45:13 ? 07:45:21 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/339360/1 07:45:22 patch 339360 - swift - Make verbose unicode test output working 07:45:25 notmyname: i need to look again into that patch & bug, but sounds so 07:45:29 Is that one related? 07:47:03 okay cschwede_ to look at it 07:47:29 thanks 07:47:59 #topic open discussion 07:48:56 I think that's all we have on the agenda today. Anyone has other topics to bring up? 07:49:02 o/ 07:49:03 might be worth linking to this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446762/ when removing translations from our code 07:49:03 patch 446762 - oslo.i18n - add notes about skipping log translation setup (MERGED) 07:49:09 or rather, as question 07:49:25 we also need to prepare the birthday party for patch 337297 07:49:26 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/337297/ - swift - Add support to increase object ring partition power 07:49:33 yay! 07:49:36 it's getting one year in a few weeks! 07:49:37 cschwede_: :/ 07:50:01 oops, I thought you had linked to the merged composite ring patch 07:50:08 cschwede_ congrats :) 07:50:28 mahatic: no, it's increase part power 07:50:35 We should def get it in. It's awesome 07:50:37 yeah, I see that :) 07:51:09 it had a +2 from Pete on a last patchset 07:51:22 yes; i had to rebase it again because of a merge conflict 07:51:49 cschwede_: sorry, I know my global ec + composite ring had big conflicts with that 07:51:58 and thanks for working to update 07:52:17 kota_: now that global ec patches have landed, does that mean you could look at composite rings? 07:52:17 Had timburke finished looking? I noticed he was going back and forth for a while on it 07:52:18 kota_: no worries! 07:52:53 notmyname: do you mean part power increase ^^ ? 07:52:57 notmyname: yeah, i could look at *the increase part power* 07:53:12 mattoliverau: maybe - he updated the patch a while ago and fixed a few things 07:53:12 that's fair 07:53:26 yes, I mean part power increase :-) 07:53:41 :) 07:54:30 I think we have another 5 mins 07:54:32 kota_: thanks! 07:54:39 notmyname: you had something to ask? 07:54:53 it kinda got covered 07:55:15 okay 07:55:20 more positive news ... we have in last few weeks landed composite ring support and per-policy affinity config which are both pieces of work that Kota started a long time ago :) 07:56:02 \o/ 07:56:04 as it's open discussion, I have two patches related to cname_lookup/domain_remap that got +2 from tim, waiting for a an other reviewer from +1 workflow :) 07:56:07 yey, thanks acoles for helping it's done! 07:56:08 congrats kota_ ! and of course everyone else who helped get it merged 07:56:09 one is bugfix: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/435771/ 07:56:09 patch 435771 - swift - Rewrite redirection in cname_lookup & domain_remap 07:56:25 and other a new feature: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/435768/ 07:56:25 patch 435768 - swift - Allow to configure the nameservers in cname_lookup 07:57:05 if anybody got some times to have a look, that would be awesome :) 07:57:37 Will try :) 07:58:00 thx mattoliverau 07:58:08 rledisez: I have them starred, will try to get round to them soon 07:58:11 mattoliverau: you've already promised to loot at at least 2 others! 07:58:22 s/loot/look/ 07:58:25 That's why I said I'll try ;) 07:58:27 I could try and look at one of those 07:58:36 mahatic: thanks 07:58:44 thx mahatic 07:59:08 okay, if that's all we have - let's conclude 07:59:25 thanks so much for coming, it was a great first start to a new TZ meeting :) 07:59:34 mahatic: well done! 07:59:39 Nice work mahatic! 07:59:39 thx mahatic for chairing 07:59:48 thanks mahatic! 08:00:03 mahatic: thanks for chairing and leading the whole group to set this up! 08:00:21 thank you too for making it a great start! 08:00:29 notmyname: thanks for your help! 08:00:39 #endmeeting