21:00:12 #startmeeting Zaqar 21:00:12 Meeting started Mon Jun 1 21:00:12 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is flaper87. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:00:13 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:00:16 The meeting name has been set to 'zaqar' 21:00:25 WHAT'S UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUP PEOPLEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ???????????????????????????????????????????????????? 21:00:31 * flaper87 super excited 21:00:36 vkmc: dynarro flwang ? 21:00:46 \o/ 21:00:56 our agenda for today 21:00:58 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Zaqar#Agenda 21:01:02 sup! 21:01:04 o/ 21:01:07 o/ 21:01:10 helloooo there :) 21:01:15 * flaper87 overwhelmed 21:01:19 * sigmavirus24 lurks like kragniz 21:01:20 y'all welcome 21:01:28 sigmavirus24: we recruited kragniz 21:01:30 sigmavirus24: I lurk better than you lurk 21:01:32 he doesn't know yet 21:01:37 flaper87: sounds legit 21:01:48 * sigmavirus24 waves to vkmc 21:01:51 #topic Summit Feedback 21:02:02 vkmc: want to start? 21:02:27 * flaper87 throws cold water on vkmc's face 21:02:33 wake up girl! 21:02:43 whaaaaaa 21:02:44 sorry 21:02:45 Now you know what we, Europeans, suffer with this meetings. 21:02:45 hi! 21:02:52 these* 21:03:04 * vkmc waves 21:03:10 flaper87: don't be so dramatic. =P 21:03:15 vkmc: feedback from the summit? Anything you want to share to start with? 21:03:21 * flaper87 cries on sigmavirus24's shoulder 21:03:28 ha! it was a pretty interesting summit 21:03:35 there there 21:03:51 we had great sessions with people working on Sahara and Heat 21:04:45 glad we could help :) 21:08:48 sooo, meeting? 21:08:50 rip our brave leaders 21:09:00 time for anarchy then 21:09:00 * kragniz eyes up freenode 21:10:38 ¯\_ツ_/¯ 21:11:38 netsplit 21:11:59 welcome back 21:12:06 thx 21:12:38 flaper87, netsplit! 21:12:43 knock? 21:12:44 sorry, connection 21:12:45 :( 21:12:46 yeah 21:12:54 what was the last message you got ? 21:13:14 * flaper87 checks logs 21:13:39 I was updating folks about the summit, not sure if those reached the other end 21:13:45 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/064739.html 21:13:46 flaper87: feedback from summit? Anything you want to share to start with?" 21:13:49 for people reading logs, that's the discussion on the mailing list 21:13:54 last I saw 21:13:55 It was indeed a very interesting summit... As vkmc said, there were quite a few sessions with people from other projects 21:13:59 these sessions - as we wanted - ended up in action items that - unlike other summits - are actually being worked on 21:14:04 That's great news for the project and it means we'll keep spending time on it 21:14:08 if anyone tries to bail out on the project, I'll .... actually... you know what's going to happen 21:14:19 that's the overall summary from me 21:14:21 lol 21:14:26 I'm quite happy with the result 21:14:40 anyone wants to add something? otherwise we can get to the actual plans/items 21:15:22 plans/items \o/ 21:15:31 + 21:15:33 +1 21:15:49 ++1 does nothing ryansb 21:15:53 at least not in C =P 21:16:03 let's go on! 21:16:45 sigmavirus24: works in gerrit 21:17:23 haha 21:18:13 flaper87, ? 21:20:02 netsplit again, I guess 21:20:14 * kragniz eyes up freenode again 21:21:25 fuck this shit 21:21:27 #topic Liberty specs and plans 21:21:37 no idea what's going on 21:21:41 but really, fuck this shit 21:21:44 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/zaqar-specs,n,z 21:21:49 those are our specs so far... There are some missing but I believe their priority is lower 21:21:55 flwang is not around :( 21:21:59 anyway, lets start with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/185951/ 21:22:05 dynarro: anything you want to say/add ? 21:22:20 I think it's a no-brainer and we should let her work on that (will do proper introductions at the end) 21:22:27 vkmc: any comments on that one? 21:22:35 I suggested moving websockets out of there 21:22:52 since that's not an API change but rather a complete different protocol 21:23:08 yeah, that would make sense 21:23:20 s/would make/makes/ 21:23:22 :P 21:23:25 haha 21:23:27 yeah, flaper87 I've changed those things you told me 21:23:53 the specs looks good to me as is now 21:23:57 ok, since netty netty is shitty shitty lets move on to the next one before I get kicked out again 21:23:59 vkmc: agreed 21:24:06 vkmc: pls, +2 and I'll approve later 21:24:26 certainly the client needs some love :) 21:24:27 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/186346/ 21:24:30 thanks dynarro for writting the spec! 21:24:34 vkmc: oh yeah! 21:24:37 dynarro: danke 21:24:45 np! 21:24:49 :) 21:24:58 So, that one is simple too. Just a backlog dir so that people not interested in working on features can still propose them 21:25:14 it should be an easier way to get proposals from other folks 21:25:33 that's more like a heads up :P 21:25:36 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/186345/ 21:25:47 ok, that's one of the juicy ones for this cycle 21:25:54 It's for pre-signed URLs 21:26:29 In a gist, pre-signed URLs will grant access to external - therefore unauthenticated - users to some resources in Zaqar 21:26:33 flaper87: I had a thought on that: would project-scoped tempurls make any sense? 21:26:50 to grant access to, say, a group of queues? 21:27:06 ryansb: mmh, in that case, I'd rather have a shared user with a limited role 21:27:27 I see; just a thought 21:27:34 not a crazy one, though. 21:27:51 It'd probably be easier once we have policy and the bases of pre-signed URLs 21:28:21 fajr 21:28:26 * flaper87 just noticed ryansb and therve have commented on the spec 21:28:26 *fair enough 21:28:36 ryansb: thanks for taking the time 21:28:44 I'll read the comments tomorrow and address them 21:29:09 That said, I'm curious to know if vkmc, dynarro and/or flwang (who's not here) have questions regarding the feature 21:29:22 (or ryansb, or anyone) 21:29:24 :P 21:29:37 I don't have any question regarding the feature, I should reread the spec 21:29:55 The main usecase is to allow these users/services - say a guest-agent - to access those resources without too much magic 21:30:01 I'd like to read, though, how is the Heat use case specifically 21:30:08 if its somewhere :) 21:30:16 vkmc: for the signed urls? 21:30:22 that one isn't written down afaik 21:30:44 it's more or less "send a tempurl to a client so we can send it messages" 21:30:59 ryansb, to manage Heat resources? 21:31:34 no, to have clients (like cloud-init/heat-cfntools) on nodes be able to have messages sent to them without polling heat directly 21:32:00 so when heat creates a server, it can fire the data off to the zaqar queue for that client, and the client picks it up when it boots 21:32:01 oh cool 21:32:13 In addition to that, Sahara and Murano are looking forward to use this feature for their guest-agents 21:32:31 there's the other use case for heat, which is sending events like "your stack is done" or "this resource blew up" to users without polling heat 21:32:42 tl;dr: we want to stop having people poll us so much 21:32:47 that makes sense 21:32:59 thanks ryansb 21:33:01 * flaper87 read to day a proposal for "Efficient polling" 21:33:10 * flaper87 -> head -> desk 21:33:10 haha 21:33:14 lol 21:33:27 anyway... moving on 21:33:29 at least they didn't say "low-latency polling" 21:33:31 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/179673/ (Policy) 21:33:40 flwang proposed this before the summit 21:33:52 It follows pretty much what other openstack projects do w.r.t policies 21:34:03 It proposes adopting oslo.policy and adding a policy.json 21:34:27 I'd be happy to have this for several reasons. Besides having policies, I've been also thinking how to extend them in a per-queue basis 21:34:45 call me crazy but even in a per-message basis 21:34:52 but one step at a time 21:34:54 hm 21:35:02 I'll be writing those thoughts down this week 21:35:05 seems you like policies 21:35:09 so we can start brainstorming over a spec 21:35:10 per-message sounds a little crazy 21:35:18 but per queue/project would be great 21:35:34 vkmc: no, I just don't like people reading my messages 21:35:36 ryansb, +1 21:35:37 :P 21:35:43 flaper87, lol 21:35:47 ryansb: yeah, that'd be the first step 21:36:10 I think I have a good proposal 21:36:15 anyway 21:36:26 does anyone have objections/thoughts on that spec ? 21:36:37 I nitpicked on it today 21:36:47 but other than that, it seems pretty straight-forward 21:36:47 no right now, will review tomorrow 21:37:05 vkmc: why didn't you read the specs *before* the meeting? ah? ah? ah? 21:37:20 * flaper87 sent a meeting invitation a week ago 21:37:29 flaper87, I got lost on debugging other stuff 21:37:37 the day just... happened 21:37:41 and I didn't notice 21:37:44 vkmc: it's aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalways the same excuse 21:37:45 :P 21:37:49 * flaper87 hugs vkmc 21:37:52 hahaha 21:37:56 lol 21:37:58 I'll review tomorrow, I promise 21:38:14 yeah right... Send me some gummybears while you are at it 21:38:26 sure sure 21:38:35 anyway, that's all spec wise 21:38:50 actually, I lied 21:39:05 vkmc: I'll get to your websocket review soon 21:39:16 however, It'd be amazing to complete that spec during liberty 21:39:16 flaper87, sounds good! 21:39:24 you'll have to propose it for liberty 21:39:35 I guess moving it and adding a history should be enough 21:39:38 yeah, I'd like to have up to claims in liberty 1 21:39:40 I've seen Nova folks doing so 21:40:08 we need to discuss what to do with pools, flavors 21:40:08 Also, another missing spec (shaifali said she's going to work on that) is the tests refactor 21:40:26 I need to triple-check what's her time commitment 21:40:42 vkmc: agreed, lets get the data plane out of the way 21:40:49 .. first 21:40:56 sounds good 21:41:07 so I'll propose the spec for liberty then 21:41:13 and rebase the messages patch for websockets 21:41:34 vkmc: just make sure you don't endup debugging rst for a day 21:41:37 ok ? 21:41:38 :P 21:41:48 I cannot promise that 21:41:52 * flaper87 hides from vkmc punches 21:41:55 haha 21:42:10 ok, now, that's really it spec wise 21:42:17 #topic clean ups 21:42:27 There are several clean ups to do in the codebase 21:42:39 For instance, we still have old sqlalchemy models around 21:43:01 I'll be dedicating time to some of those clean ups but I'll sure file bugs when I find them 21:43:15 if someone shows up looking for something to do, you know where to look 21:43:33 We also need to add an env var for zigo so he can run tests 21:43:41 It's not as straightforward as I thought 21:43:50 since we're using config files for our tests 21:44:06 shouldn't env vars override config files? 21:44:12 I proposed him to use sed but I never heard back from him. I think he just rage-quited and ran away 21:44:40 ryansb: yeah, it's just the way these tests are structured that makes it hard 21:44:56 unfortunately, we ended up having mongdb:// urls everywhere 21:45:11 because we used to have sqlite://:memory: there 21:45:24 ah :/ 21:45:25 That was a mistake that we need to fix somehow 21:45:35 maybe we could use mongo mock for that? 21:45:36 in the long term 21:45:38 especially requesting mongodb for unittests, which is not ideal 21:45:55 I looked into mongomock and I'm afraid that it may not support all the features we need 21:45:58 :/ 21:46:06 We use many things from mongo 21:46:11 oh hmm 21:46:13 here's my thought re-tests 21:46:49 Once they are merged, we should just let devs choose what they want to test against (redis/mongodb) and then have our gates as we have them 21:47:00 (by merged I mean the work shaifali is going to do) 21:47:34 And move all tests requesting running dbs to `functional` where they belong 21:47:48 In other words, Shaifali has a lot of work 21:48:49 anyway, 10 mins left 21:48:54 we probably can divide some work on that side 21:49:00 vkmc: yeah 21:49:12 I think we'll have to wait for the merge to happen, though 21:49:24 just to have a clearer view of how the tests structure will look like 21:49:28 yeah, certainly 21:49:32 at the very least, we should wait for the spec 21:49:38 that said, I agree 21:49:42 we should split that 21:50:15 We can ask dynarro to do 99.9 % of the work and we do the remaining 0.1% 21:50:28 whaaaat!!! 21:50:29 +1 flaper87 21:50:33 oh hi dynarro 21:50:42 haha 21:50:43 dynarro: oh you're here? oooooooops ? 21:50:50 oh well 21:50:57 #topic Open Discussion 21:51:09 As usual, I'd like to welcome our new mentee 21:51:26 We've a record, we've been mentoring Outreachy mentees every cycle 21:51:31 and I'm proud of us 21:51:40 In this cycle, dynarro will be our mentee 21:51:44 \o/ 21:51:46 welcome dynarro! 21:51:52 and I'd like to thank vkmc for stepping up as a mentor in this cycle 21:51:53 * angvp claps 21:51:58 happy to have you on board :) 21:51:59 welcome! 21:52:15 angvp: oh look showed up just when we finished splitting the work 21:52:18 .... 21:52:23 haha 21:52:32 so, really. Welcome, dynarro 21:52:49 we're all excited to have you and you better do a great job or we'll never like you again 21:52:50 EVER! 21:52:54 >.> 21:52:55 thanks! I'm SO happy to be part of it! 21:53:05 hahaha 21:53:28 dynarro, you know you are doomed, right? you won't be able to leave Zaqar, ever! 21:53:49 hahaha....I know... 21:54:01 I'd like to also thank all the folks that participated in sessions at the summit.... If you were here, I'd mention you but I guess ryansb will take all the credits this time 21:54:02 :) 21:54:11 woo 21:54:20 ryansb: thanks for all your amazing feedback... We look forward to see tons of patches landing everywhere 21:54:28 Also, during the summit we talked a bit about using swift as a backend for zaqar. So far, I have the basic (post/get/delete) flow working and I'll probably post a review later in the week 21:54:33 (patches related to Zaqar, we don't care about the rest) 21:54:44 flaper87 vkmc ok, i can help dynarro with 0.1% of the work too :P 21:54:46 ryansb, that's great! 21:54:46 heh, yeah. Hoping to get some zaqar stuff into L1-heat 21:54:49 ryansb: wow, sweet, niiiiiiiiiiiiiice! 21:54:57 I'd love to see that backend 21:55:05 angvp: hahaha thanks 21:55:14 currently I sort of hacked it, I'm still using redis for the management store 21:55:38 but my eventual hope is to do sqlalchemy for management and swift for all the queues/messages 21:55:49 ryansb: that's ideal 21:55:55 any reason why you're not using sqla already ? 21:56:10 because I tried it briefly and got an indecipherable error message 21:56:22 Redis will work until you try to create a pool in it (since it's not supported :P) 21:56:36 ryansb: mmh, ok, I'll give it a try and fix whatever is broken there 21:56:47 angvp: actually, you do it 21:56:51 :P 21:56:51 it may have been due to operator (me) error 21:57:02 ohhh, it's always ops fault 21:57:05 :P 21:57:13 only when I'm the operator ;) 21:57:16 in any case, pools shouldn't be needed for swift 21:57:36 ryansb: btw, are you developing it in the code base? or as an external plugin ? 21:57:40 since the scaling/storage is all handled in swift, no need for us to wrap an API 21:57:45 you know you can have it as a third-party plugin, right ? 21:58:05 I'm doing it in the code base, I didn't feel like messing around to make it a plugin 21:58:24 ryansb: but you may want to have swift+redis in the data-plane and you'll need pools in that case 21:58:36 hrm. maybe 21:58:39 pools are not just to scale the same storage type 21:58:44 that's what I wanted to say 21:58:49 not that you really need that combination 21:58:56 yeah, I see now 21:58:56 ryansb: Thanks for hacking on that 21:59:05 ryansb: has it been hard to implement ? 21:59:14 (I mean form a Zaqar's perspective) 21:59:24 not so far, but there are a lot of things I haven't done yet (claims) 21:59:33 gotcha, those might be messy 21:59:42 ok, we ran out of time :) 21:59:54 ah. Well I ran out of implementation :) 22:00:02 * ryansb moves back to #zaqar 22:00:03 Next week we'll have the meeting at this same time and the week after we'll be back to our alternate 22:00:09 .. schedule 22:00:11 cool! 22:00:12 THANKS ALL! 22:00:17 LONG LIVE ZAQAR! 22:00:19 #endmeeting