| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-11-29 | |||
| 16:14:10 | bauzas | not all of us work upstream everyday :) | |
| 16:14:10 | sean-k-mooney | we could but the idea was to have 2 of them | |
| 16:14:15 | sean-k-mooney | to take the pressure off m3 | |
| 16:14:26 | sean-k-mooney | so one before m2 and one before m3 | |
| 16:14:32 | gibi | I'm back on the 5th of Jan | |
| 16:14:55 | sean-k-mooney | so we coudl proably do one on the 10th of january | |
| 16:15:01 | sean-k-mooney | most will be around by then | |
| 16:15:09 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I don't disagree, I'm just advocating that some folks couldn't be able to have two review days on the same week | |
| 16:15:15 | sean-k-mooney | if we want ot keep it aligned to the meetign days | |
| 16:15:28 | gibi | 10th works for me | |
| 16:16:17 | bauzas | gibi: we don't really need to align those review days to our meeting | |
| 16:16:26 | bauzas | gibi: but this is nice as a reminder | |
| 16:17:02 | gibi | so I think we are converging on Dec 14th as spec and Jan 10th as a code review day | |
| 16:17:36 | bauzas | I think this works for me | |
| 16:17:53 | bauzas | and we can have another implementation review day later after Jan 10th | |
| 16:18:15 | sean-k-mooney | ya sure that sound workable | |
| 16:18:39 | bauzas | as a reminder, Antelope-3 (FF) is Feb 16th | |
| 16:18:55 | bauzas | more than 5 weeks after Jan 10th | |
| 16:19:09 | sean-k-mooney | there are still a few bits i would hope we can merge by the end of the year however. namely i would liek to see us make progress on the pci in placement serises | |
| 16:19:20 | bauzas | sure | |
| 16:19:52 | sean-k-mooney | ok so i think we can move on for now | |
| 16:19:56 | bauzas | what we can do is to tell we can review some changes by Dec 15th if we want so | |
| 16:20:23 | bauzas | that shouldn't be a specific review day, but people would know that *some* folks can review their changes by this day | |
| 16:20:39 | bauzas | anyway, I think we found a way | |
| 16:21:08 | gibi | yepp | |
| 16:21:11 | bauzas | #agreed Dec-14th will be a spec review day and Jan-10th will be an implementation review day, mark your calendars | |
| 16:21:41 | bauzas | #action bauzas to send an email about it | |
| 16:22:16 | bauzas | #agreed Some nova-cores can review some features changes around Dec 15th, you now know about it | |
| 16:22:27 | gibi | :) | |
| 16:22:28 | bauzas | OK, that's it | |
| 16:22:43 | bauzas | moving on | |
| 16:22:50 | bauzas | (sorry, that was a long discussion) | |
| 16:22:54 | bauzas | #topic Review priorities | |
| 16:23:00 | bauzas | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement+OR+project:openstack/os-traits+OR+project:openstack/os-resource-classes+OR+project:openstack/os-vif+OR+project:openstack/python-novaclient+OR+project:openstack/osc-placement)+(label:Review-Priority%252B1+OR+label:Review-Priority%252B2) | |
| 16:23:05 | bauzas | #info As a reminder, cores eager to review changes can +1 to indicate their interest, +2 for committing to the review | |
| 16:23:30 | bauzas | I'm happy to see people using it | |
| 16:23:56 | bauzas | that's it for that topic | |
| 16:24:00 | bauzas | next one | |
| 16:24:07 | bauzas | #topic Stable Branches | |
| 16:24:13 | bauzas | elodilles: your turn | |
| 16:24:16 | elodilles | ack | |
| 16:24:20 | elodilles | this will be short | |
| 16:24:23 | elodilles | #info stable branches seem to be unblocked / OK | |
| 16:24:27 | elodilles | #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci | |
| 16:24:30 | elodilles | that's it | |
| 16:25:58 | gibi | nice | |
| 16:26:14 | bauzas | was quick and awesome | |
| 16:26:36 | bauzas | last topic but not the least in theory, | |
| 16:26:45 | bauzas | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:26:55 | bauzas | nothing in the wikipage | |
| 16:26:58 | bauzas | so | |
| 16:27:04 | bauzas | anything to discuss here by now ? | |
| 16:27:08 | gibi | - | |
| 16:27:17 | sean-k-mooney | did you merge skipign the failing nova-lvm tests yet | |
| 16:27:26 | sean-k-mooney | or is the master gate still explodingon that | |
| 16:27:30 | bauzas | I think yesterday we said we could discuss during this meeting about the test skips | |
| 16:27:46 | bauzas | but given we merged gmann's patch, the ship has sailed | |
| 16:27:56 | sean-k-mooney | ack | |
| 16:28:02 | sean-k-mooney | so they are disabeled currently | |
| 16:28:05 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: see my ML thread above ^ | |
| 16:28:06 | sean-k-mooney | the failing detach tests | |
| 16:28:15 | sean-k-mooney | ah ok will check after meeting | |
| 16:28:19 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: you'll get the link to the gerrit change | |
| 16:28:20 | sean-k-mooney | nothing else form me | |
| 16:28:29 | auniyal | hand-raise: zuul frequent timeout issue/fails - this seems to be resource issue, is it possible zuull resource can be increased ? | |
| 16:29:09 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: tl;dr: yes we skipped the related tests but maybe they are actually not needed as you said | |
| 16:29:16 | sean-k-mooney | auniyal: not really timeout are not that common in our jobs | |
| 16:29:24 | bauzas | auniyal: see what I said above, we had problems with the gate very recently | |
| 16:29:26 | sean-k-mooney | auniyal: do you have an example | |
| 16:29:31 | auniyal | in morning when there are less number of jobs running if we run same, job gets passed | |
| 16:29:40 | auniyal | like less then 20 | |
| 16:29:47 | auniyal | right now 60 jobs are running | |
| 16:29:52 | sean-k-mooney | that should not really be a thing | |
| 16:30:03 | sean-k-mooney | unless we have issues with our ci providers | |
| 16:30:17 | bauzas | auniyal: if you speak about job results telling timeouts, agreed with sean-k-mooney, you should tell which ones so we could investigate | |
| 16:30:24 | sean-k-mooney | we ocationally have issues with slow providers but its not normally coralated with the number of runnign jobs | |
| 16:30:29 | bauzas | yup | |
| 16:30:35 | auniyal | ack | |
| 16:30:38 | bauzas | timeouts are generally an infra issue | |
| 16:30:43 | bauzas | from a ci provider | |
| 16:30:50 | bauzas | but "generally" | |
| 16:31:04 | bauzas | which means sometimes we may have a larger problem | |
| 16:31:07 | sean-k-mooney | auniyal: do you have a gerrit link to a change where it happend | |
| 16:31:12 | dansmith | are they fips jobs? | |
| 16:31:31 | clarkb | bauzas: I'm not sure I agree with that statement | |
| 16:31:31 | sean-k-mooney | oh ya it could be that did we add the extra 30 mins ot the job yet | |
| 16:31:38 | clarkb | we have significant amounts of very inefficient test payload | |
| 16:31:55 | clarkb | yes slow providers make that worse, but we have lots of ability to improve things in the jobs just about every time I look | |
| 16:32:15 | sean-k-mooney | clarkb: we dont often see timeouts in the jobs that run on the nova gate | |
| 16:32:29 | sean-k-mooney | we tent to be well within the job timeout interval | |
| 16:32:45 | sean-k-mooney | that is not nessialy the same for other projects | |
| 16:32:46 | clarkb | (it is common for tempets jobs to dig into swap which slows everything down, devstack uses osc which is super slow because it gets a new token for every request and has python spin up time, ansible loops are costly with large numbers of entries and so on) | |
| 16:32:58 | auniyal | sean, I am trying to find a link but its time taking | |
| 16:33:04 | clarkb | sean-k-mooney: yes swap is a common cause for the difference in behaviors and that isn't an infra issue | |
| 16:33:15 | clarkb | sean-k-mooney: and devstack runtime could be ~halved if we stopped using osc | |
| 16:33:25 | clarkb | or improved osc's startup and token acquisition time | |
| 16:33:31 | sean-k-mooney | clarkb: ack | |
| 16:33:36 | clarkb | I just want to avoid the idea its an infra issue so ignore it | |
| 16:33:39 | sean-k-mooney | ya the osc thing is a long runing known issue | |
| 16:33:49 | clarkb | this assertion gets made often then I go looking and there is plenty of job payload that is just slow | |