| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-05-20 | |||
| 14:39:47 | efried | one of my colleagues actually brought up the idea of being able to encrypt the file with the passwords in it. | |
| 14:39:47 | mordred | yeah - or maybe to make config mgmt easier - just put the clouds.yaml directly in git, and then have a secure.yaml that's templated/written out ... | |
| 14:39:56 | efried | mm | |
| 14:40:00 | mordred | also might make things nicer for people using k8s - you can put the secure.yaml in a k8s secret | |
| 14:40:16 | efried | there's a mechanism to use certificates rather than passwords, right? | |
| 14:40:42 | efried | oh, yeah, next section down. | |
| 14:40:42 | mordred | I think? | |
| 14:40:44 | mordred | yeah | |
| 14:41:14 | mordred | so that's probably a better way to deal with service-to-service secrets | |
| 14:41:33 | mordred | many many options :) | |
| 14:42:03 | efried | shrug, up to the operator. Point is, all of the option availability and documentation is owned by sdk, single point of code & reference, which makes nova's life easier. | |
| 14:43:11 | efried | btw, staging-wise, I'm thinking nova's stage 1 is zero operator changes, just keep using ksa opts and we'll feed them to sdk under the covers (via your wip patch); and we can transition to clouds.yaml later on. | |
| 14:43:43 | efried | Probably when we've done away with all the clients | |
| 14:44:28 | efried | I would have to think through what it would mean to set up the Connection just to get the endpoint to pass to the client. Whether having clouds.yaml in the mix would even be possible in that scenario. | |
| 14:44:41 | efried | I guess I don't see why not. | |
| 14:45:48 | efried | okay, speculation has reached point of diminishing returns. I'll go off and try to crystallize this. Thanks again. | |
| 14:52:21 | mordred | efried: \o/ ... crystalization | |
| 18:16:37 | dustinc | 👍 | |
| 19:05:46 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Remove deprecated volume commands and args https://review.opendev.org/612751 | |
| 23:50:32 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/osc-lib master: Add FakeModule from OSC https://review.opendev.org/660230 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-05-21 | |||
| 01:21:23 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/api-sig master: Update liaison for keystone https://review.opendev.org/659613 | |
| 07:16:39 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: WIP rework statistics reporting https://review.opendev.org/659841 | |
| 10:23:08 | ITD27M01 | gtema: Hope you have a fruitfull day! I have a question about this: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstacksdk/src/branch/master/openstack/cloud/_dns.py#L169 | |
| 10:24:29 | ITD27M01 | gtema: If I understand this correctly there is no pagination logic and only one page will be returned regardless of recordsets in designate ? | |
| 10:25:56 | gtema | well, cloud/_dns is quite an old implementation | |
| 10:26:19 | gtema | so it really depends on the designate how it will treat absense of limit | |
| 10:26:38 | ITD27M01 | gtema: The default is 20 recordsets per page :( | |
| 10:28:02 | gtema | hmm, than yeah, something might be lost | |
| 10:29:48 | gtema | it would be a bug in Designate thou | |
| 10:30:31 | gtema | basically the cloud/_dns should be switched to use proxy | |
| 10:31:44 | gtema | ITD27M01: what I mean is that sometimes I have seen bugs, that services might return only i.e. default 20 results if `limit` is not passed | |
| 10:32:15 | gtema | this would be clearly a bug. If that is not the case - list_recordsets will return all results in one page | |
| 10:38:56 | ITD27M01 | gtema: We found a problem through ansible. The cloud.list_recordsets returns only one page. | |
| 10:39:53 | ITD27M01 | gtema: And there no way to specify the limit. We have increased the limit on server side from 20 to more. | |
| 10:40:31 | gtema | ok, than basically sdk use dns proxy in the cloud layer should resolve the situation | |
| 10:42:03 | ITD27M01 | gtema: Ok, Can you please explain me the logic of the "proxy" in sdk, I have heard from you many times, but did not understand. | |
| 10:43:53 | gtema | see example in https://opendev.org/openstack/openstacksdk/src/branch/master/openstack/cloud/_image.py#L75 | |
| 10:44:30 | gtema | cloud/_dns.py:list_recordsets should use self.dns.recordsets function instead of doing request itself | |
| 10:45:36 | gtema | unfortunately I do not have today to fix this. But all of the functions in the cloud/_dns should use methods defined in openstack/dns/v2/_proxy.py instead of manual requests | |
| 10:45:55 | gtema | this is however also a "bigger" change with respect to adapting tests properly | |
| 10:51:10 | ITD27M01 | gtema: Ok, I will create bug request for it so we don't lose it. | |
| 10:52:24 | gtema | great | |
| 11:29:43 | brtknr | Hello | |
| 11:29:59 | brtknr | Whats the protocol for backporting changes in ansible | |
| 11:30:23 | brtknr | I have these two backports from dev branch to 2.8 and 2.7: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/56708 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/56709 | |
| 11:30:49 | gtema | brtknr: https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/community/development_process.html | |
| 11:36:55 | brtknr | I have followed the protocol here: | |
| 11:36:57 | brtknr | https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/56710 | |
| 11:40:16 | brtknr | And here: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/56711 | |
| 13:42:08 | mordred | gtema: I look forward to getting that "use proxy layer in cloud layer" project done | |
| 13:42:19 | mordred | having proper pagination support everywhere will be nice | |
| 13:42:39 | gtema | hehehe | |
| 13:42:50 | gtema | can be done soon | |
| 13:43:16 | gtema | would appreciate your thoughts on vendor_hook and rework of stat reporting | |
| 13:43:33 | gtema | and then can go for "use proxy" | |
| 13:43:34 | mordred | yes! they are on my review-today list | |
| 13:43:41 | gtema | great | |
| 15:04:45 | ITD27M01 | gtema: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2005749 | |
| 15:06:10 | gtema | ITD27M01: taken. | |
| 15:06:17 | gtema | thanks | |
| 15:20:44 | ITD27M01 | gtema: I have also another proposal for you today. What do you think about filtering feature in Ansible openstack inventory plugin? | |
| 15:20:56 | ITD27M01 | gtema: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/51401 | |
| 15:21:11 | ITD27M01 | In some cases, the host patterns cannot help to split infrastructure into small pieces. For example when openstack project/tenant contains | |
| 15:21:11 | ITD27M01 | thousands of instances. And a lot of users works with such a project. | |
| 15:21:33 | ITD27M01 | The aws inventory plugin is an example of such filtering: | |
| 15:21:43 | ITD27M01 | https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/plugins/inventory/aws_ec2.html | |
| 15:21:47 | ITD27M01 | In the case of server-side filtering, we can get a significant performance gain. | |
| 17:28:40 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: add openstack server resurrect command https://review.opendev.org/643578 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-05-22 | |||
| 06:51:39 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: baremetal: allow updating name and extra fields of an allocation https://review.opendev.org/660578 | |
| 08:37:37 | ITD27M01_ | gtema: Hello! I have also another proposal for you today. What do you think about filtering feature in Ansible openstack inventory plugin? | |
| 08:37:39 | ITD27M01_ | https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/51401 | |
| 08:39:01 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: baremetal: allow updating name and extra fields of an allocation https://review.opendev.org/660578 | |
| 10:15:32 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: baremetal: allow updating name and extra fields of an allocation https://review.opendev.org/660578 | |
| 10:23:56 | gtema | ITD27M01_, with respect to ansible pool you mentioned. We have now finally all the possible filters from nova inside SDK | |
| 10:24:20 | gtema | what we still need, however, is support all of those in the cloud/_compute.py | |
| 10:24:53 | gtema | This will be likely covered same as for DNS during switching all of those methods to use service proxies | |
| 10:25:31 | gtema | I will start working on those next week | |
| 10:37:48 | ITD27M01_ | gtema: Do you mean that cloud.list_servers can be changed? | |
| 10:37:53 | ITD27M01_ | gtema: I want to invite you to participate in the discussion and review of the pull-request. | |
| 10:38:00 | ITD27M01_ | https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/51401 | |
| 10:39:18 | gtema | well, to be honest I see currently that cloud.list_servers already uses proxy layer, meaning all the filters should be already supported | |
| 10:39:56 | gtema | only that there is no filter for metadata | |
| 11:01:46 | ITD27M01_ | gtema: Only one caveat about inventory module in cloud. There is search_hosts method which uses the _utils._filter_list for filtering. | |
| 11:01:47 | ITD27M01_ | https://opendev.org/openstack/openstacksdk/src/branch/master/openstack/cloud/inventory.py#L79 | |
| 11:02:04 | openstackgerrit | Dmitriy Rabotyagov (noonedeadpunk) proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add ability to provide qos_policy_id for port https://review.opendev.org/660680 | |
| 11:06:18 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: baremetal: allow updating name and extra fields of an allocation https://review.opendev.org/660578 | |
| 11:06:44 | ITD27M01_ | gtema: Remembering the conversation about the division of filters into the server-side and client-side. I do not quite agree with this implementation - there will be a lot of calculations on the client side (in large installations). | |
| 13:11:35 | stingrayza | mnaser: could I pester you for an updated shipit on https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/56453 please? (it seems as if the changes I made after invalidated your original one) | |
| 13:11:55 | mnaser | stingrayza: let me have a look | |
| 13:12:02 | stingrayza | thanks! :) | |
| 13:12:33 | mnaser | stingrayza: voilaa | |
| 13:14:02 | stingrayza | mnaser: thanks a mil :) | |
| 13:37:09 | stingrayza | (I'd love a shipit from anybody else that can throw one up... https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/56453) | |
| 13:55:55 | stingrayza | mordred: :hat-tip: thanks :) | |
| 14:39:48 | openstackgerrit | Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Microversion 2.73: Support adding the reason behind a server lock https://review.opendev.org/659124 | |
| 16:46:48 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add 'openstack server resurrect' command https://review.opendev.org/643578 | |
| 19:49:06 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/osc-lib master: Final switch to stestr https://review.opendev.org/660815 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-05-23 | |||
| 02:36:20 | openstackgerrit | Brin Zhang proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add changes-before attribute to server list https://review.opendev.org/657373 | |
| 04:37:14 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/osc-lib master: Final switch to stestr https://review.opendev.org/660815 | |
| 06:00:53 | openstackgerrit | Chinmay Naik proposed openstack/keystoneauth master: Resolves a typo in a link to use Application Credentials https://review.opendev.org/660886 | |