Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2022-07-26
16:33:55 chateaulav ill see if I cant dedicate some time this week to take a look.
16:34:34 elodilles thanks!
16:34:39 bauzas cool, moving on then
16:34:46 bauzas and thanks all for discussing it
16:34:47 elodilles for the workaround suggestion, too, sean-k-mooney
16:35:10 elodilles bauzas: ++
16:35:16 bauzas #topic Open discussion
16:35:24 bauzas (bauzas) will be on PTO between Aug 3rd and Aug 29th, who would want to chair the 3 meetings ?
16:35:55 bauzas or do we need to cancel those ?
16:36:09 gibi I think I can take them
16:36:09 bauzas I'd prefer the former honestly, given we're on zed-3
16:36:23 bauzas gibi: <3
16:36:35 gibi 9th, 16th, 23rd
16:36:35 bauzas I'll be back on time before the 3rd milestone
16:36:54 bauzas should even be around on IRC on Monday but shhhtttt
16:37:46 bauzas #action gibi to chair 3 nova meetings (Aug 9th, 16th and 23rd)
16:38:04 Uggla bauzas, can we define the microversion for virtiofs/manila ?
16:38:07 bauzas I'll chair next week's meeting
16:38:13 bauzas Uggla: good question
16:38:33 bauzas I was about to write an email for asking people to look at https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-zed-microversions-plan
16:38:51 bauzas but given we had the CI outage from last week, I didn't had time to do it
16:39:37 bauzas to be fair, I'll write the email to ask people to propose their microversion changes if they think they're already done
16:40:02 bauzas Uggla: for the moment, plan to use 2.93
16:40:24 Uggla ok sounds good to me.
16:41:35 bauzas melwitt wrote something for last meeting but we hadn't time to discuss about it AFAIR
16:41:42 bauzas tch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/764486 (thank you gibi for adding a comment 🙂)
16:41:42 bauzas (melwitt) I will not be at the meeting today but in case you missed it, I'm seeking input regarding terminology used in the currently named "ephemeral encryption" feature spec and patches: https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-July/029546.html. If you have thoughts on whether the terminology should be changed to something other than "ephemeral encryption", please comment on the ML thread or on this pa
16:42:10 bauzas sounds a new naming bikeshed \o/
16:43:01 bauzas any opinions about a possible good name instead of "ephemeral encryption" ?
16:43:12 bauzas reminder : I'm terrible at naming things
16:44:11 bauzas sean-k-mooney: to be fair, we name "ephemeral disks" disks that are created and aren't volumes
16:44:22 bauzas and are persisted
16:44:34 sean-k-mooney ephmeral disks are only the disk created form flavor.ephmeral
16:44:55 sean-k-mooney so to me it wrong ot ever use it in any other context
16:45:05 bauzas if you have a flavor with DISK_GB=10, correct me if I'm wrong but you'll get a 10GB disk that will be an "ephemeral disk"
16:45:23 bauzas (not a BFV I mean)
16:45:57 sean-k-mooney no
16:46:05 sean-k-mooney that is incorrect terminology
16:46:10 sean-k-mooney and what im objecting too
16:46:13 gibi local vs volume, root vs ephermeral, these are the terminologies in the API doc
16:46:28 sean-k-mooney right
16:46:33 bauzas https://docs.openstack.org/arch-design/design-storage/design-storage-concepts.html
16:46:48 bauzas Ephemeral storage - If you only deploy OpenStack Compute service (nova), by default your users do not have access to any form of persistent storage. The disks associated with VMs are ephemeral, meaning that from the user’s point of view they disappear when a virtual machine is terminated.
16:47:07 bauzas we name them "ephemeral" because we delete the disk when the instance is removed
16:47:21 gibi and we delete volumes as well if so configured :D
16:47:26 sean-k-mooney whihc is not correct
16:47:40 sean-k-mooney deleting somting at the end of its lifetime does not make it epmeral
16:48:05 bauzas technically, you can have ephemeral disks on shared storage (NFS)
16:48:07 sean-k-mooney if we delete a volume we also expect the data to be removed
16:48:14 sean-k-mooney or ceph
16:48:20 sean-k-mooney if you use the rbd image_backend
16:48:37 bauzas sean-k-mooney: I don't disagree with you, I'm just explaining our docs
16:49:17 sean-k-mooney yep
16:50:05 bauzas not only our upstream docs btw... https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openstack_platform/16.2/html/creating_and_managing_instances/con_types-of-instance-storage_osp :)
16:50:12 sean-k-mooney so i would prefer something like local_disk_encryption, instance_disk_encypriton or similar
16:50:29 sean-k-mooney bauzas: right but there are many other things wrong with our downstream docs
16:50:32 gibi +1 on local disk encryption
16:51:55 bauzas I'd prefer local disk encryption over instance disk encryption
16:51:58 sean-k-mooney im not going to block this progressing on the name
16:52:22 sean-k-mooney i just find the usage of ephmeral to rever to storage tied to the vms lifecycle to be mildly insulting
16:52:26 bauzas because an instance disk can either be "ephemeral" (from local libvirt disk), or something else
16:53:02 bauzas technically, this ephemeral storage is actually our virt driver local storage
16:53:21 bauzas depending on the virt driver you use
16:53:30 sean-k-mooney its not nessiarly local
16:53:33 bauzas tell ironic about it :)
16:53:44 sean-k-mooney well for libvirt or vmware
16:53:47 bauzas yeah, see, I made that mistake
16:53:51 sean-k-mooney the storage can be clusterd or remote
16:53:55 bauzas shared storage is ephemeral
16:54:05 bauzas so, not local
16:54:08 sean-k-mooney this is why i dont like using that term
16:54:18 melwitt hey o/ thanks for discussing the naming bikeshed :) just wanted to get some confidence that ppl would prefer a name change and lessen the possibility of someone coming to the review later and saying "why did you change this, it should be changed back to ephemeral"
16:54:27 sean-k-mooney ephemeral is ambiguious
16:54:38 bauzas as is "evacuate" :D
16:54:53 bauzas our Gods of Naming didn't help
16:55:09 sean-k-mooney maybe we need dansmith to write another blog post
16:55:20 sean-k-mooney melwitt: ack so i guess the real question is
16:55:20 bauzas problem solved.
16:55:28 bauzas #action dansmith to write a blogpost
16:55:31 sean-k-mooney do we think channging the name will make thing clearer
16:55:35 dansmith heh
16:55:45 bauzas oh, snap, he saw it
16:55:46 opendevmeet Removing item from minutes: #action dansmith to write a blogpost
16:55:46 bauzas #undo
16:55:46 melwitt :)
16:55:52 dansmith In general, I'm not for renaming things like this
16:56:05 bauzas I'm not against renaming ity
16:56:17 bauzas I just wanted to make sure we all agree on what this is
16:56:30 bauzas ephemeral is a bad name, but that's a name we already use
16:56:34 dansmith because you'll end up with all old docs being inaccurate for new stuff, and people who already understand this will also have to change
16:56:46 melwitt that was one of my concerns
16:56:47 bauzas if we pick something else, this has to be better understandable about what it is
16:57:19 bauzas yeah, if we need to write some doc explaining "ephemeral" == "this new thing" this is bad
16:57:39 bauzas hence the challenge
16:58:00 gibi so this is considered a non fixable terminology mistake of the past?
16:58:08 bauzas like tenant ? :)
16:58:15 gibi we are fixing tenant
16:58:22 sean-k-mooney well to me that doc that is erfernce is not a nova doc
16:58:25 bauzas I know, I'm opening a can of worms
16:58:26 sean-k-mooney so we could jsut fix it

Earlier   Later