03:00:07 #startmeeting zun 03:00:08 Meeting started Tue Feb 7 03:00:07 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is hongbin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 03:00:10 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 03:00:12 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Zun#Agenda_for_2017-02-07_0300_UTC Today's agenda 03:00:12 The meeting name has been set to 'zun' 03:00:16 #topic Roll Call 03:00:21 Namrata 03:00:24 o/ 03:00:24 lakerzhou 03:00:28 kevinz 03:00:29 Madhuri Kumari 03:00:31 Wenzhi 03:01:02 thanks for joining the meeting Namrata sudipto lakerzhou kevinz mkrai Wenzhi 03:01:11 let's get started 03:01:13 #topic Announcements 03:01:17 none 03:01:22 #topic Review Action Items 03:01:28 1. hongbin create a spec for host capability (DONE) 03:01:33 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/expose-host-capabilities 03:01:48 any comment on this bp? 03:02:11 Is there any spec posted for it? 03:02:29 mkrai: sudipto has drafted a spec about cpu policy 03:02:33 I haven't got chance to read it, but will do it tomorrow. 03:02:42 I read the bp and the idea is clear 03:02:50 ok 03:03:00 hi 03:03:06 hey eliqiao_ 03:03:08 I am late ,sorry, in a meeting. 03:03:14 np 03:03:28 lakerzhou: thanks for your comment on the spec, it is helpful 03:03:36 ok, moving on 03:03:38 #topic Cinder integration (diga) 03:03:45 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/cinder-zun-integration The BP 03:03:50 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/417747/ The design spec 03:04:03 it looks diga is not here 03:04:11 i saw he submitted a patch for that 03:04:26 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/429943/ 03:04:39 feel free to comment on the patch if you like 03:04:51 any comment on this bp? 03:05:24 ok, next topic 03:05:26 #topic Kuryr integration (hongbin) 03:05:32 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/kuryr-integration The BP 03:05:57 i am working on this one, there is a spec that seems to be closed 03:06:08 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/425883/ 03:06:30 feel free to comment on it if you interest 03:06:48 any comment? 03:07:22 ok, next one 03:07:23 #topic Support interactive mode (kevinz) 03:07:29 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/support-interactive-mode The BP 03:07:33 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396841/ The design spec 03:07:36 kevinz: ^^ 03:08:05 Hi hongbin, I've submitted a new patch set after address you and Pradeep's comments 03:08:07 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/422525/ 03:08:41 If the API and code is Ok, I will add more test cases for this 03:09:15 cool, will find some time tomorrow to go through it again 03:09:37 OK Thanks :D 03:09:57 kevinz: a question for you, which version of docker-py you required for this feature? 03:10:27 hongbin: Now it's fine with currently version. 03:10:33 kevinz: ack 03:11:12 any other comment on this feature? 03:11:32 I will go through the code today. 03:11:59 thanks kevinz sudipto_ 03:12:04 sudipto_: Cool, thanks 03:12:13 ok, next one 03:12:15 #topic Introduce host capabilities and cpusets 03:12:20 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/427007/ The spec 03:12:27 sudipto_: you want to drive this one? 03:12:58 Ok, so this is the work for exclusive cpusets that drove us to think about a light weight scheduler to begin with. 03:13:15 lakerzhou, recommended that we do this work keeping in mind the nova's new placement API. 03:13:27 "ZUN won't support a compute host to have both dedicated and a shared policy at the same time applicable to it. " sounds to me, this assumption is too strong 03:13:56 Is there any link for nova's new placement API? What is it? 03:14:17 #link http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/placement.html 03:14:19 lakerzhou, the reason why this is dicey is because, for a shared case - you wouldn't know which cpusets are being shared - and then if the user requests dedicated - then you may take out the already in use cpusets 03:14:31 the same behaviour is in Nova as well today. 03:14:38 can you please explain a little bit why to make such assumption? we can talk offline if you prefer 03:15:35 Nova's new placement APIs are still getting ironed out, so i have made a few 'ease of use' assumptions for us. 03:16:35 The assumption is different than existing nova's behavior. 03:17:17 do you think it is final design, or temporary solution? 03:17:28 lakerzhou, http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/ocata/approved/nested-resource-providers.html#proposed-change - In the proposed change section - the second last paragraph 03:18:24 o/ 03:18:26 ok, I will check again. let 's take it offline. It sounds a big change to me. 03:18:34 diga: hey, thanks for joining 03:18:35 lakerzhou, this behaviour can be changed, given we can isolate NUMA nodes within a given host that would be used for pinning. However, if you have a solution w.r.t how this mixed case can be achieved, then why not. 03:18:36 sorry got late 03:18:55 lakerzhou, sounds good. Your reviews have been helpful. 03:19:36 Request everyone to take a look and comment as much as possible. Esp on the implementation details. 03:19:53 hongbin, i am done :-) 03:19:58 sudipto: I hv gone through your spec, we are only considering NUMA nodes for this BP ? 03:20:01 sudipto: thx 03:20:46 diga, you could do a normal pinning as well - on a system that does not come with the NUMA capabilities (older generation) - but i thought supporting hyper threading for such systems is a must. 03:20:59 sudipto: okay 03:21:09 diga, however, these things can be worked out once we have the first draft of the code out. 03:21:26 I was just taking the most important/simplistic case to begin with. 03:21:47 sudipto: let me know if you need any help, I am working with nova-placement & have good exp in placement scenarios 03:21:50 okay 03:22:09 diga, great, first of all, i would need your help in reviewing the spec as brutally as possible :-) 03:22:28 sudipto: sure, will go through it today 03:23:03 hongbin, we are done i think. 03:23:09 as in on this topic 03:23:15 any further comment on this topic? 03:23:31 seems not 03:23:48 diga: you want to give a brief update about the cinder volume work? 03:23:59 hongbin: yes 03:24:08 diga: go ahead 03:24:42 hongbin: cinder & docker related work in remaining, API/DB level work is done 03:25:19 hongbin: I am targeting cinder & Docker to complete in 2 days 03:25:29 diga: cool 03:25:47 hongbin: simultaneosly working on zunclient for volume create/show/list/delete 03:26:31 hongbin: I think i will try to complete everything by next week core code, test case i will try to complete but not sure 03:26:42 diga: sound great 03:27:03 diga: thanks for your hard work on this one 03:27:11 diga, thank you! 03:27:19 I would ben more than happy to review the code. 03:27:20 sudipto: hongbin: welcome! 03:27:33 sudipto: :) sure 03:27:52 ok, then let's enter open discussion 03:27:57 #topic Open Discussion 03:28:19 Namrata: you want to give a brief update about your Heat resource work? 03:28:44 yeah sure. 03:28:59 hongbin: I think we should plan mid-cycle meeting or remote PTG in this month (one or two days), to plan Pike cycle features 03:29:15 I have added zun resourceshttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/426210/ 03:29:22 diga: one second 03:29:44 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/429259/ zun client plugin too 03:29:55 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/426210/ 03:30:02 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/429259/ 03:30:08 i will join the heat meeting tommorow and ask for reviewing the patches 03:30:36 Namrata: thanks 03:30:53 Namrata: the patches look good to me so far 03:30:53 further i will be working on container resource 03:31:01 thanks hongbin 03:31:14 yes, it will be a very useful feature 03:31:22 i knew solum team is looking for that 03:31:44 Namrata: hongbin : this work should go to heat correct ? zun driver in Heat ? 03:32:07 diga: Yes 03:32:10 diga:yes 03:32:15 okay 03:33:24 ok, does anyone else want to bring a topic for team discussion? 03:33:47 yes hongbin 03:33:57 eliqiao_: go ahead 03:34:10 would like to talk the disadvantage of some detail 03:34:25 disadvantage of ? 03:34:40 I tried zun recently, and found that if I create a sandbox with novadocker driver 03:34:59 we will ensure sandbox is ready (a poll with timeout) 03:35:21 yes 03:35:28 but if I delete the container before the sandbox is ready, the poll is still going. 03:35:42 i see 03:35:54 the correct logic is need to notice it and stop polling... 03:36:07 agree 03:36:31 eliqiao_: i think you filed a bug for that already? 03:36:35 seems no good solution to resolve this :( 03:36:38 better we should fix timeout issue, for every driver we use, this is typical scenarios we should handle 03:36:41 not yet 03:36:54 eliqiao_: mind filing one? 03:36:56 will do it later. 03:36:58 okay 03:37:18 #action eliqiao_ create a bug for polling issue 03:37:43 besides, another issue is that python-zunclent doesn't give detail error message 03:37:51 but lower prority 03:38:21 it's about uer experence, will file bug later.. 03:38:34 eliqiao_: great, thanks for that 03:39:01 I am done, will try zun more later and hope can give more feedback 03:39:09 eliqiao_: thx 03:39:16 thanks for listening :) 03:39:38 any other topic ? 03:40:02 ok, all. thanks for joining the meeting 03:40:06 #endmeeting