14:01:04 #startmeeting watcher 14:01:05 Meeting started Wed Nov 18 14:01:04 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is acabot_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:01:07 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:01:10 The meeting name has been set to 'watcher' 14:01:13 hi 14:01:18 hi 14:01:20 o/ 14:01:27 o/ 14:01:27 o/ 14:01:34 o/ 14:01:35 hi 14:01:53 our agenda for today #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Watcher_Meeting_Agenda#11.2F18.2F2015 14:01:56 o/ 14:02:05 hi 14:02:09 o/ 14:02:14 o/ 14:02:15 feel free to add anything you like to discuss 14:02:53 is Nishi here ? 14:03:37 lets move on to our first topic 14:03:43 #topic annoucements 14:04:38 as mentioned in the agenda, we have 2 ad hoc meetings planned regarding the POC and academic contributions 14:04:57 any other announcement ? 14:05:18 I am still working with BU in the meetup 14:05:27 I should know tomorrow if they can host it. 14:05:33 ok great 14:05:38 cool 14:05:42 They have a workshp tomorrow and that has taken all the nergy they have 14:05:44 can you remind us the dates ? 14:05:57 one sec 14:06:31 Hello from Moscow, Servionica. We are working on rst-specs for overload-underload algorithms. 14:07:03 1/20-21 or 2/3-4 0r 1/26-27 14:07:06 alexchadin : great thanks, please send a public review as soon as you can 14:07:20 alexchadin: +1 14:07:32 Where should we publish it? 14:07:39 launchpad? 14:08:13 review.openstack.org (watcher-specs project) and launchpad 14:08:46 jwcroppe_: yeap, thanks! 14:08:57 here is an example: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246363/ 14:09:24 in /specs/mitaka/approved/watcher-overload-underload.rst 14:09:47 acabot_: approved? 14:10:11 Does it have to be reviewed before it is approved to move in "under approve"? 14:10:26 yes, approved ... it won't be in repo until it's merged 14:10:31 what has been approves 14:10:35 sable : yes sorry we only have a "implemented" folder 14:10:53 sballe: so it's implicitly approved if we merge it :) 14:10:56 nishi: our poc is approved to move n 14:11:04 merged means approved:-) 14:11:06 ok 14:11:08 alexchadin : can we say your proposition is already "implemented" ? 14:11:17 sorry Im late 14:11:41 welcome Kevin 14:11:42 acabot_: if it's not integrated into watcher i don't think it's implemented 14:11:59 ok so lets do it in "approved" and we will merge it in the future 14:12:18 +1 14:12:23 bzhou: I understand. I just wanted to make sure it was in line with the watcher pylosophy around being just a plug-in before it is approved. 14:12:24 +1 14:12:27 acabot_: implemented in watcher? 14:13:09 alexchadin : forgive it ;) 14:13:30 alexchadin: your stuff will have to be integrated inthe watcher framework. right? 14:13:56 I am looking to seeing the specs that describe how everything fits within watcher 14:14:08 sballe : +1 14:14:26 #topic review action items 14:15:15 jed56 : can you give us an update regarding telemetry integration ? 14:15:21 sballe: For now it works with OpenStack Nova Compute, but we are planing to integrate in with watcher. The problem is to get stats from compute-nodes, but it is another watcher-blueprint.from 14:15:22 A general comment for Telemetry integration: 14:15:22 The code is going to remove datasource (concept) and influxdb store and ONLY depends on ceilometer to provide meters. 14:15:38 yes 14:15:54 we have a first version we need to check that everying is working 14:15:54 +1 14:16:15 we also start cleanup a bit the code 14:16:18 jed56: one you have checked it let bzhou and junjie know 14:16:37 mann too many typos this morning. I need more coffee 14:16:42 sballe: yes I hope before the end of the week 14:16:49 perfect 14:17:06 jed56: is there any background that we remove datasource and influxdb as store? 14:17:07 bzhou : yes exaclty 14:17:34 I'm not sure if we could get every meters only from ceilometer 14:17:49 yes but we can custom metrics in ceilometer 14:17:53 add 14:17:59 alexstav: we cannot merge your code if it doesn't fit in the wathcer framework which is why I am insisting on that point. But I am sure you understand that 14:18:09 telemetry v2 allows us to create new metrics and store them 14:18:24 +1 14:18:44 we don't to maintain influxdb store 14:18:57 because ceilosca project and ceilometer 14:19:18 so are we also going to drop watcher-metering-drivers? 14:19:39 jed56: next cycle I would like for us to add support for Monasca as the source of telemetry too 14:19:39 we can still use metering driver to push metrics into ceilometer 14:19:53 but we have a overlap with the project monasca 14:19:56 sballe: we are going to make patch with our spec-improvements 14:19:57 an 14:20:36 I think we don't to focus our work in the monitoring 14:20:38 bzhou : this is something we will keep to inject additional metrics in telemetry but for devstack support, we need to give up our metering chain 14:20:45 alexchadin: will you contribute to the watcher framework too? 14:20:52 want 14:21:05 sballe: yes, we will 14:21:17 alexchadin: great! 14:21:47 sballe : this the idea to support Monasca and Ceilometer 14:22:27 Monasca will eventually take over IMHO 14:22:35 a spec is available for review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246363/ 14:22:37 But not today 14:22:38 sballe: Before we do that, we would like to make sure our specs have been approved by you:) 14:22:47 :) 14:23:01 acabot_: why for devstack support, we need to give up our metering chain? Because watcher-metering-drivers is not managed by openstack? 14:23:55 bzhou: we also thought that Ceilometer was the way to go for devstack since it is an openstak project and already part od devstack 14:24:17 bzhou : because deploying Watcher today is too complex and we need to provide a quick install running on top of telemetry (available in devstack) 14:25:09 acabot_: +1 14:25:09 bzhou : watcher-metering-drivers will never be maintained by OpenStack as Ceilometer agent exists already 14:25:14 I am assuming if you want you can still use the watcher-metering-drivers with devstack but on a do it yourself basis 14:25:16 So the publisher is also going to be dropped, right? 14:25:21 I agree, we it will be better to focus on the main task 14:26:18 We can make use of the existing project 14:26:26 just want to make sure I understand the architecture change 14:26:26 speaking of devstack, i have finally freed up from my ibm work and can start working on the devstack plugin shell script 14:26:28 bzhou : we can still use it to push it in ceilometer for specific metrics like kwapi 14:26:34 bzhou : again we won't drop it, we will simply add Telemetry integration as a default solution for collecting metrics 14:27:50 bzhou : the idea is to have Telemetry working as a "common framework" for metrics collection 14:28:13 acbot_: got it, thanks. Will the project watcher-metering be maintained by OpenStack? 14:28:46 bzhou : watcher-metering is maintained by b-com (on our own github repo) 14:29:03 I am assuming that if wathcer needs it we can fold it in under watcher 14:29:12 acabot_: ^^^ 14:29:14 +1 14:29:26 sable : of course 14:30:02 please review the proposed code here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246363/ 14:30:50 this is the spec. 14:30:50 next topic is loading optimization strategies into watcher 14:31:01 acabot_: thanks. So we may need to change the architecture doc:-) 14:31:21 +1 14:31:28 sorry, here is the link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246534/ 14:31:43 would it make sense to start a new arch doc kind of a v2? 14:31:51 bzhou : yes vamp is working on it 14:32:04 bzhou : vamp sorry 14:32:05 great 14:32:49 sable : a new wiki page ? 14:33:02 * edleafe joins late 14:33:03 my nick is sballe 14:33:28 acabot_: ^^ FYI 14:33:41 yes a new wiki page would work 14:34:21 I like to keep the history of the architecture and how it evolves 14:34:30 FYI vamp is vmahe :-) 14:34:35 :-) 14:34:41 :-) 14:34:50 #action acabot_ start a new wiki page for Watcher architecture v2 14:35:07 acabot_: get all our nicks wrng this morning. he needs more coffee' 14:35:34 lol 14:35:35 As we discussed, we want Watcher to be able to be fed custom metrics - but the reference arch should support basic telemetry/ceilometer. Agree? 14:35:41 sorry for that, my IRC client is cleaning all your nicks after sending the message... 14:36:06 jwcroppe_ : agree 14:36:13 +1 14:36:16 +1 14:36:20 +1 14:36:23 +1 14:36:29 +1 14:36:30 cool 14:36:35 +2 14:36:35 +1 14:36:35 but one question: we need to define a framework 14:36:45 bzhou: +1 14:37:28 My thoughts were taht whatever is in Ceilomter can be used. 14:37:35 bzhou : not sure to understand, what do you mean by a framework ? 14:37:52 but we do need a way to bring extra telemetry in 14:38:01 I mean people can use it to easily feed custom metrics 14:38:09 maybe not from Telemtry 14:38:36 so are you saying we need to keep the wathcer metric agrent for that use case? 14:38:36 bzhou : to my understanding with Telemetry v2 API, anyone can add any custom metrics in Telemetry 14:38:48 bzhou : you can use ceilometer to add custom metrics or 14:39:00 monasca 14:39:15 bzhou : so except if you dont want to use Telemetry, you will never need our Watcher metering chain 14:40:01 agree 14:40:20 ok lets move on loading strategies in Watcher 14:40:27 exactly 14:40:29 acabot_ +1 14:41:09 +1 14:41:22 the review is here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/245903/ 14:41:32 I will add it to the agenda 14:42:18 Looks cool 14:42:31 FYI : we'll provide more details regarding the integration of Telemetry v2 in the associated spec and the impacts on the current Watcher components 14:42:46 +1 14:43:19 See https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246363 14:44:03 thanks vmahe_, can you jump on documentation topic ? 14:44:30 all right 14:44:50 So regarding the loading of new strategies 14:45:09 I'm currently writing a Glossary to make sure that every one speaks the same language 14:45:09 it's still in progress 14:45:26 waiting for proper testing 14:45:29 vincentfrancoise: I am assumign doc ill be added too 14:46:16 sballe: Yes, there's a plugins.rst added in this changeset explaining how to implement a new strategy 14:46:17 I believe we will be testing it. taht was one of the actinos items we wee given at the poc meeting. 14:46:46 can you ping us when it is ready to be tested? 14:46:50 sballe:+1 14:47:13 In parrallel, we are thinking about adding a gloassary to the documentation to lay down the right terminology to use throughout the code / doc 14:47:30 see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246370/ 14:48:04 We need to mae sure everyone agrees on words such as "Action", "Meta-Action", ... 14:48:13 i will take a look at that vincentfrancoise 14:48:40 I'm currently reviewing it and will push a new patch set very soon 14:49:39 I also did some testing with the tool used by the Nova team to generate some architecture diagrams 14:49:55 Which is named Dia 14:50:24 they have put in the repo a source directory for the diagrams which is used to generate some SVG or PNG images 14:50:59 The issue with Dia is that it is not human readable source code. 14:51:21 I need to do some testing also with PlantUML (which is also free) 14:51:46 and makes it possible to do any UML diagrams : class diagrams, sequence diagrams, ... 14:52:02 sounds interesting 14:52:12 sballe : you plan to submit a spec for energy minimization POC ? 14:52:55 acabot_: yes Iwill be working with nishi, bzhou and the team on it. After yesterday's meeting we just needed to do some last minute adjustement to the poc 14:53:22 sballe : great, please fill it in approved folder for review 14:53:23 I'll work on it as soon as I am back from SC'15 14:53:29 there is an extension for Sphynx which makes it possible to include PlantUML source code directly in the RST files : https://pypi.python.org/pypi/sphinxcontrib-plantuml 14:54:00 #topic Blueprint/Bug Review and Discussion 14:54:03 what do we need to fill 14:54:38 nishi : you need to feel a spec file based on templates availble on watcher-specs 14:54:47 fill not feel ;-) 14:54:48 ok 14:55:11 regarding blueprints 14:55:32 vmahe_ has submitted a new one https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/watcher-add-actions-via-conf 14:55:34 nishi: https://github.com/openstack/watcher-specs 14:55:41 I'll work with you 14:56:14 great 14:56:32 we need to agree on the mechanism for adding new actions to Watcher 14:56:38 when do you come back from SC 14:56:47 tomorow 14:56:50 ok 14:57:06 nishi: I could help too if you need 14:57:45 ook 14:57:50 I'm also available :) 14:57:57 lol 14:58:05 jwcroppe_ sballe : can you look at this BP before next meeting to fix priority ? 14:58:41 #action jwcroppe_ sballe acabot_ set priority for BP https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/watcher-add-actions-via-conf 14:58:56 sorry but we wont have time for open discussions today 14:58:56 acabot_: Kevin_Zheng wants to work on bp: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/make-watcher-use-graduated-oslo-lib 14:59:10 will do 14:59:26 bzhou : right there is review in progress on it, I will set it as started 14:59:32 acabot_: will do 14:59:49 thanks 15:00:08 bzhou : https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246153/ right ? 15:00:19 acabot: thanks 15:00:36 thank you guys for your time 15:00:39 we are out of time 15:00:44 #endmeeting