| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-04-23 | |||
| 16:10:37 | bauzas | for the moment, we don't have any review day this month | |
| 16:11:08 | bauzas | #topic vPTG Summary | |
| 16:11:18 | bauzas | #info The vPTG was held on Apr 8-12 | |
| 16:11:24 | bauzas | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/P5HFYXU2VPGEJTY26SLBTU3LTAIVMGZT/ Nova PTG summary | |
| 16:11:32 | bauzas | in case you haven't seen the email ^ | |
| 16:11:50 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: thanks for having replied to it | |
| 16:12:00 | bauzas | (to explain more) | |
| 16:12:19 | bauzas | nothing I should tell more I think | |
| 16:12:24 | bauzas | #topic Review priorities | |
| 16:12:29 | bauzas | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-dalmatian-status | |
| 16:12:34 | sean-k-mooney | i have a related question for the open discuss section but it was a good summary | |
| 16:12:35 | bauzas | I'll update it shortly | |
| 16:12:42 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: shoot | |
| 16:12:47 | bauzas | oh | |
| 16:12:59 | bauzas | okay, let's do it in the open discussion topic | |
| 16:13:10 | bauzas | #topic Stable Branches | |
| 16:13:19 | bauzas | elodilles: time is yours | |
| 16:13:25 | elodilles | #info no recent merges, but stable/202*.* branches' gates should be OK | |
| 16:13:37 | elodilles | #info stable/zed is still blocked by nova-ceph-multistore (constantly failing) | |
| 16:13:44 | elodilles | on the other hand: | |
| 16:13:50 | elodilles | #info stable/zed is about to move to Unmaintained: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/916472 | |
| 16:14:00 | elodilles | for this, the question follows: | |
| 16:14:08 | elodilles | do we want to prepare a final stable/zed release? (content would be: https://paste.opendev.org/show/bCISlMJXDFrMjVD5kyaS/ ) | |
| 16:14:26 | sean-k-mooney | yes | |
| 16:14:29 | bauzas | yup | |
| 16:14:44 | sean-k-mooney | the two libvirt ones are required for windows guest on arm and live migration of windows guests | |
| 16:14:54 | sean-k-mooney | *windows guests on amd hosts not arm | |
| 16:15:16 | elodilles | currently we cannot merge more fixes, only if we set ceph-multistore non-voting :/ (or someone has time to investigate the gate issue there) | |
| 16:15:28 | sean-k-mooney | well they are merged | |
| 16:15:36 | elodilles | ACK for the release, then i'll prepare a release patch for that | |
| 16:16:02 | bauzas | ++ | |
| 16:16:03 | sean-k-mooney | on a related note | |
| 16:16:06 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: i meant for the patches that haven't merged yet o:) there are some waiting | |
| 16:16:10 | bauzas | elodilles: ping me when you provide it | |
| 16:16:17 | elodilles | bauzas: will do | |
| 16:16:27 | bauzas | elodilles: for the moment, I'm a bit off the channel and the gerrit emails | |
| 16:16:38 | bauzas | thanks | |
| 16:16:50 | sean-k-mooney | ah ok. if there was a impoant patch i would not be agsint makign it non-voting, for 2023.1 shoudl we prepare a patch to remove the grenade job | |
| 16:17:25 | sean-k-mooney | my inclination is we shoud remove the grenade jobs form 2023.1 when stable/zed moves to unmaintained/zed | |
| 16:17:45 | sean-k-mooney | i lean to do ing that before the branch is renamed but we could do it after | |
| 16:18:09 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: probably that will be needed after stable/zed will be deleted, but might be possible to keep it, we have to check when we get there | |
| 16:18:39 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure if we want to keep it | |
| 16:18:42 | sean-k-mooney | even if its possible | |
| 16:19:08 | sean-k-mooney | since upgrade supprot form unmainiend branches is not impleied and is actully expressly not supproted | |
| 16:19:09 | elodilles | if the job is passing then why remove it? | |
| 16:19:26 | sean-k-mooney | mainly to save gate resouces by not testing somethign we dont supprot | |
| 16:19:30 | elodilles | but yes, let's see first how it will behave :) | |
| 16:19:38 | sean-k-mooney | ack | |
| 16:19:50 | bauzas | cool | |
| 16:19:58 | bauzas | we could discuss this in the gerrit change | |
| 16:20:04 | elodilles | +1 | |
| 16:20:12 | elodilles | last note from me: | |
| 16:20:15 | elodilles | #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci | |
| 16:20:37 | elodilles | that's all about stable branches | |
| 16:21:36 | bauzas | cool | |
| 16:21:46 | bauzas | #topic vmwareapi 3rd-party CI efforts Highlights | |
| 16:21:51 | bauzas | fwiesel: anything ? | |
| 16:21:54 | fwiesel | #info Nothing to report. | |
| 16:22:26 | fwiesel | Just a short reminder or request for a second review of my proposed patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/909474 | |
| 16:22:44 | bauzas | OK, I'll try to look at it | |
| 16:23:25 | fwiesel | I understdoot that there was the idea to have a subteam for the vmwareapi driver. Is that the right time to raise that topic? | |
| 16:23:33 | sean-k-mooney | its relitivly short and i belive its correct but i agree it would be good to make a decision on that sooner rather then later | |
| 16:23:49 | sean-k-mooney | sure | |
| 16:24:06 | dansmith | oh yeah I need to look at that | |
| 16:25:31 | fwiesel | Thanks, that would be then all from my side. | |
| 16:28:13 | bauzas | ++ | |
| 16:28:27 | bauzas | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:28:32 | bauzas | nothing from me | |
| 16:28:37 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: you had an item | |
| 16:28:50 | sean-k-mooney | yes its mainly a question fo paperwork | |
| 16:29:12 | bauzas | shoot | |
| 16:29:15 | sean-k-mooney | for the eventlet removeal work, ill create a bluepirnt eventlet-removal-part-1 | |
| 16:29:23 | sean-k-mooney | i assume i shoudl also have a spec? | |
| 16:29:53 | sean-k-mooney | or do we want to review the blueprint first and see if we are ok with a specless blueprint | |
| 16:30:04 | bauzas | no | |
| 16:30:17 | bauzas | we said at the PTG that I'll automatically accept it as specless :) | |
| 16:30:41 | bauzas | in case we need to discuss some specific design nits for upgrade concerns, per say, then we could ask later for a spec | |
| 16:30:43 | sean-k-mooney | ok then ill work on a bluepirnt for the next meeting to define a semi detialed scope for this cycle | |
| 16:31:04 | bauzas | cool | |
| 16:31:20 | bauzas | I think we all agreed on the direction so we should be good | |
| 16:31:40 | bauzas | maybe the threadpools could have some concerns but we can discuss them in the implementation changes | |
| 16:32:00 | sean-k-mooney | ack that was basically all i wanted to confirm | |
| 16:32:02 | bauzas | for the workers using direct threads, I don't think we have any problems | |
| 16:32:30 | sean-k-mooney | well in generall i would prefer to aovid spawning raw thread outside of a pool in new places | |
| 16:32:35 | bauzas | we said we prefered to use parallel threads instead on concurrent ones | |
| 16:32:39 | sean-k-mooney | but as you said we can review that on the patches | |
| 16:33:08 | bauzas | there are different threads, right? | |
| 16:33:40 | sean-k-mooney | you will have to rephase that question, im not following. | |
| 16:33:41 | dansmith | what does "parallel instead of concurrent" mean? | |
| 16:33:44 | bauzas | like, for the services workers, it's not a problem, we would create all the threads when starting the service | |
| 16:34:07 | sean-k-mooney | your repheing to how we have a worker count for the schduler | |
| 16:34:20 | bauzas | dansmith: I mean that we would thread instead of greenthreading | |
| 16:35:00 | sean-k-mooney | ok yes we woudl be using pthreads/OS threads instead fo userland/green threads | |
| 16:35:02 | dansmith | bauzas: okay so you mean async instead of one of parallel or concurrent I think, but okay | |
| 16:35:18 | sean-k-mooney | in pything the gil means they are still concurrent not turely parallel | |
| 16:35:37 | sean-k-mooney | *in python | |
| 16:35:39 | bauzas | sure | |
| 16:35:51 | bauzas | we still have the GIL so they're not really paralled | |
| 16:35:59 | bauzas | but they're threads | |
| 16:36:05 | dansmith | they're still parallel, IMHO | |