| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2020-05-07 | |||
| 16:42:37 | mordred | brtknr: are you have having issues with 0.45 and python 2.7? if so, we should figure them out and see if we can't figure out how to release an 0.45.1 point release | |
| 16:42:49 | mordred | but otherwise, you should get 0.45 and it should work | |
| 16:59:23 | elmiko | catch y'all later, stay safe out there o/ | |
| 17:43:35 | dtroyer | Are there any known issues with uploading images to vmware-backed clouds since the image code was switched to SDK? I am getting persistent checksum failures with osc 5+ but not 4.0.0 | |
| 18:40:02 | mordred | dtroyer: no, not to my knowledge. that said - I do wanna say we found $something related to checksums uploading to $somewhere - but I thought it was fixed | |
| 18:42:38 | mordred | I'm not finding anything ... | |
| 18:43:21 | mordred | gtema: ^^ | |
| 18:43:30 | mordred | gtema: do you remember something with that? | |
| 18:47:11 | dtroyer | mordred: ok, thanks. I'll put together a repeatable command and get some logs. The same image uploaded to DreamCompute fine with basically the same command and osc venv. | |
| 18:48:21 | mordred | dtroyer: *awesome* | |
| 18:49:03 | mordred | dtroyer: maybe there's a transform happening cloud-side or something | |
| 18:50:40 | dtroyer | I do know it is VMware's Queens-era vSphere+OpenStack whatever-they-call-it but that's about it | |
| 18:50:52 | mordred | dtroyer: clarkb says: | |
| 18:50:54 | mordred | clarkb>mordred: ish. They dont do anything useful except for the swift based upload dedup | |
| 18:51:03 | mordred | clarkb>mordred: glance can change the image without telling you and so thr checksum you provide to glance is uselss also glance doesnt check it aiui | |
| 18:51:33 | mordred | dtroyer: so it's possible we're providing a checksum to glance now which is potentially problematic because $sadness | |
| 18:52:18 | dtroyer | I suppose it should be noted too that these are vmdk images, which I've never uploaded to Glance before, dunno if there is anything to that | |
| 18:52:36 | mordred | dtroyer: if you find that to be true, I'd definitley be in support of just not providing it if it's garbage with no value and only serves to possible break people | |
| 18:53:45 | mordred | dtroyer: look for validate_checksum in openstack/image/v2/_proxy.py | |
| 18:53:51 | dtroyer | when I loop back around to this I can tweak that out to see if it matters…kk | |
| 18:53:51 | dtroyer | when I loop back around to this I can tweak that out to see if it matters…kk | |
| 18:54:18 | mordred | dtroyer: I think as an easy first step - we can probably just set that to false in osc | |
| 18:54:35 | mordred | dtroyer: and if that fixes it - maybe we change the default value in sdk to false | |
| 18:55:23 | mordred | dtroyer: when the cloud backend is swift and we have to upload to swift first, we use the locally calculated checksums as a de-duplication step so that if yo have to upload again you can avoid re-uploading swift objects | |
| 18:55:34 | mordred | but I thnik for non-swift it really is just a waste of energy | |
| 18:55:58 | mordred | and even in the swift case I don't think the glance checksum helps anything | |
| 19:52:40 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Add cipher list support for octavia https://review.opendev.org/721351 | |
| 21:38:55 | brtknr | mordred: weirdly that issue has magically disappeared now. not sure why it was there in the first place | |
| 21:39:24 | brtknr | its working for me now, nothing to worry about | |
| 21:59:02 | mordred | brtknr: \o/ | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2020-05-08 | |||
| 10:04:43 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix metric names in the object_store https://review.opendev.org/726167 | |
| 14:47:02 | nightmare_unreal | how does osc cli determine which api version to use ?? | |
| 15:30:50 | openstackgerrit | Alex Schultz proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Don't error if clouds.yaml is not readable https://review.opendev.org/726416 | |
| 15:44:54 | openstackgerrit | Sagi Shnaidman proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: DNM test q branch https://review.opendev.org/726421 | |
| 16:03:23 | gtema | mordred, we don't have a PTG slot planned for SDK or API-SIG? Or am I blind | |
| 16:06:29 | gtema | dtantsur, elmiko ^^. Deadline seems to be this Sunday | |
| 16:07:22 | elmiko | we put forth no planned session for the api-sig | |
| 16:07:45 | elmiko | is there a desire to have one? (i feel like we are running on fumes at this point, activity-wise) | |
| 16:08:03 | gtema | we were talking to have some | |
| 16:08:13 | gtema | discovery documents, etc | |
| 16:08:45 | elmiko | gtema: if you want to take the lead on proposing a session for api-sig, i'm +2 for it =) | |
| 16:08:46 | gtema | and definitely on SDK part | |
| 16:08:58 | elmiko | i figured sdk would have something to talk about | |
| 16:10:36 | gtema | okay, filling the form | |
| 16:15:04 | gtema | does anyone knows, whether it's only about filling form (we want), or also the time planning in ethercalc? | |
| 16:17:49 | elmiko | i'm not sure | |
| 16:18:13 | gtema | I'm also lost in all those emails | |
| 16:18:41 | elmiko | maybe reach out to diablo_rojo_phon ? | |
| 16:18:48 | smcginnis | I think the ethercalc is the important step. | |
| 16:19:15 | gtema | okay, will do so | |
| 16:19:47 | gtema | I guess for both API-SIG and SDK/CLI we are mostly Europe+US, right? | |
| 16:22:37 | gtema | those ironic guys, blocked almost each day ;-) | |
| 16:27:45 | gtema | entered 1 hour for API-SIG June 2nd 16 - 17 UTC, and for SDK/CLI: June 1st 15-17 UTC and 3rd 15-17 UTC | |
| 16:32:06 | diablo_rojo_phon | gtema: make sure to fill out the survey too and not just the ethercalc :) | |
| 16:32:16 | gtema | done already, thans | |
| 16:32:18 | gtema | thanks | |
| 16:43:26 | diablo_rojo_phon | Thank you! | |
| 16:45:13 | elmiko | gtema: thanks for taking the lead on that =) | |
| 17:56:35 | dtroyer | mordred, gtema: Setting validate_checksum=False fixed the image create issue with the vmware cloud… It is defaulted True in 3 places in the SDK, changing only BaseImageProxy.create_image is sufficient, or of course turning it off in OSC would work too. Do you guys have a preference? | |
| 17:56:35 | dtroyer | mordred, gtema: Setting validate_checksum=False fixed the image create issue with the vmware cloud… It is defaulted True in 3 places in the SDK, changing only BaseImageProxy.create_image is sufficient, or of course turning it off in OSC would work too. Do you guys have a preference? | |
| 18:08:55 | mordred | dtroyer: I think changing it in BaseImageProxy.create_image should be fine, yeah? I think we should just do that - best I can tell it's not super useful | |
| 19:35:37 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Set BaseImageProxy.create_image validate_checksum default to False https://review.opendev.org/726465 | |
| 19:37:26 | dtroyer | mordred: ^^^ only covers the unit testing updates | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2020-05-09 | |||
| 01:34:04 | rm_work | mordred / dtroyer: found one more weird thing... the "properties" shown on `show image` are slightly different | |
| 01:35:01 | rm_work | the new client using SDK doesn't return `owner_id` and DOES return `self` which contains the relative URL to the image | |
| 01:35:13 | rm_work | which messes with some code we had in our deployment pipeline | |
| 01:51:11 | rm_work | (if you try to copy every property from an `image show` into a new `image create`, passing self is not valid | |
| 01:51:14 | rm_work | ) | |
| 01:56:35 | rm_work | in the meantime i think i will strip out the `self` in our code, but ... i wonder if others will see this issue, and what (if anything) we should do about it... I guess `owner_id` should be added in the SDK | |
| 05:39:15 | AJaeger | mordred: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstackclient/src/branch/master/playbooks/openstackclient-check-plugins/run.yaml#L13 uses pbrx - do you want to rewrite that or should we stop retiring pbrx? | |
| 10:35:57 | openstackgerrit | Sagi Shnaidman proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Ensure modules work with queens devstack https://review.opendev.org/726421 | |
| 14:36:12 | mordred | AJaeger: oh! good find. yeah, let's fix that in osc | |
| 14:37:08 | mordred | rm_work: yeah - let's fix sdk. let's add owner_id - and then for self, rather than stripping it (not sure if people need it) - let's update sdk to know not to try to send self when we create an image | |
| 14:44:35 | AJaeger | mordred: could you do the fix in osc, please? | |
| 14:57:10 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: WIP Remove all of the os_ prefixes https://review.opendev.org/713056 | |
| 14:57:18 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: WIP Remove all of the os_ prefixes https://review.opendev.org/713056 | |
| 15:44:47 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Remove all of the os_ prefixes https://review.opendev.org/713056 | |
| 15:44:48 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Rename all of the modules https://review.opendev.org/726538 | |
| 15:45:03 | mordred | AJaeger: yes - I will do it | |
| 16:07:30 | AJaeger | thanks, mordred | |
| 22:31:27 | rm_work | mordred: hmm yeah that'd work | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2020-05-10 | |||
| 00:27:21 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Show owner_id AND owner as properties https://review.opendev.org/726562 | |
| 00:30:04 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Ignore `self` property if passed on image create https://review.opendev.org/726563 | |
| 00:33:16 | rm_work | mordred: ^^ fixed. | |
| 00:33:54 | rm_work | any idea when https://review.opendev.org/#/c/725427/ might merge? Are you the only core reviewer really merging things at this point? T_T | |
| 01:04:39 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Show owner_id AND owner as properties https://review.opendev.org/726562 | |
| 02:16:50 | openstackgerrit | Adam Harwell proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Ignore `self` property if passed on image create https://review.opendev.org/726563 | |
| 07:06:39 | rm_work | mordred: so i don't really understand why the one tox-py36-tips test would have the failures it does | |
| 07:06:41 | rm_work | in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/726562/ | |
| 11:03:35 | sshnaidm|off | need an opinion of SDK devs - are there possible problems when using latest SDK to manage openstack old release, like Queens for example? | |
| 12:24:03 | mordred | sshnaidm|off: no, it should 100% work and is explicitly supported | |
| 12:44:15 | mordred | rm_work: looking at it | |
| 12:51:48 | openstackgerrit | Victor Coutellier proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add name query filter to keystone service https://review.opendev.org/726621 | |
| 12:54:33 | sshnaidm|off | mordred, great, so modules should work too | |
| 13:01:53 | mordred | sshnaidm|off: yes. if they don't it's a bug | |
| 13:02:13 | mordred | sshnaidm|off: imo, there is no reason to ever use any release of openstacksdk other than the most recent one | |
| 13:03:03 | mordred | rm_work: ok - looking in to this - I think this is a slightly different/worse issue :( | |
| 13:03:48 | mordred | rm_work: "owner_id" should never have existed - that's an sdk-side API break. the glance value is owner, the sdk value has been owner for a very long time, and it looks like the osc value was owner before the update | |
| 13:04:14 | mordred | rm_work: I'm going to see if I can't figure out how to fix it without things completely sucking | |
| 13:07:59 | openstackgerrit | Sagi Shnaidman proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Ensure modules work with queens devstack https://review.opendev.org/726421 | |