Re: [openstack-dev] [Zun] Propose addition of Zun core team and removal notice

+1 from me, Thanks Shunli for your great work :) On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Hongbin Lu wrote: > Hi all, > > > > I would like to propose the following change to the Zun core team: > > > > + Shunli Zhou (shunliz) > > > > Shunli has been contributing to Zun for a

[openstack-dev] [Zun] Propose addition of Zun core team and removal notice

Hi all, I would like to propose the following change to the Zun core team: + Shunli Zhou (shunliz) Shunli has been contributing to Zun for a while and did a lot of work. He has completed the BP for supporting resource claim and be closed to finish the filter scheduler BP. He showed a good

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][tricircle] CellsV2 in Pike?

Thank you very much, Matt, that's great news. Best Regards Chaoyi Huang (joehuang) From: Matt Riedemann [mriede...@gmail.com] Sent: 20 June 2017 9:29 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][tricircle] CellsV2 in Pike? On

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-dev[[nova] Simple question about sorting CPU topologies

Sorry, The mail sent accidentally by mis-typing ... My question is, what is the benefit of the above preference? BR, Kevin On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote: > Hi, > > In https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/ > nova/virt/hardware.py#L396

[openstack-dev] [openstack-dev[[nova] Simple question about sorting CPU topologies

Hi, In https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/hardware.py#L396 we calculated every possible CPU topologies and sorted by: # We want to # - Minimize threads (ie larger sockets * cores is best) # - Prefer sockets over cores possible = sorted(possible, reverse=True, key=lambda x:

Re: [openstack-dev] [trove][all][tc] A proposal to rearchitect Trove

On 20/06/17 12:56, Curtis wrote: > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 5:35 AM, Amrith Kumar wrote: >> Trove has evolved rapidly over the past several years, since integration in >> IceHouse when it only supported single instances of a few databases. Today >> it supports a dozen

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][tricircle] CellsV2 in Pike?

On 6/19/2017 8:02 PM, joehuang wrote: Hello, In May, Tricircle has done some work to make Nova cells V2 + Neutron + Tricircle work together[1]: each cell will have corresponding local Neutron with Tricricle local plugin installed, and one central Neutron server work together with Nova API

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

Hi, Does this look too complicated and and a bit over designed. For example, why we can't store all data in memory of single python application with simple REST API and have simple mechanism for plugins that are filtering. Basically there is no any kind of problems with storing it on single

[openstack-dev] [nova][tricircle] CellsV2 in Pike?

Hello, In May, Tricircle has done some work to make Nova cells V2 + Neutron + Tricircle work together[1]: each cell will have corresponding local Neutron with Tricricle local plugin installed, and one central Neutron server work together with Nova API server, where the Tricricle central plugin

Re: [openstack-dev] [trove][all][tc] A proposal to rearchitect Trove

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 5:35 AM, Amrith Kumar wrote: > Trove has evolved rapidly over the past several years, since integration in > IceHouse when it only supported single instances of a few databases. Today > it supports a dozen databases including clusters and

Re: [openstack-dev] [devstack] etcd v3.2.0?

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 08:17:53AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Tony, > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Tony Breeds wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 08:19:16PM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > > >> Awesome! thanks Tony, some kolla jobs do that for example,

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] How about using boto3 instead of boto in requirements

NOTE: - Removed Matthew and Sean from Cc as they'll get this via os-dev - Added ec2-api tag and PTL for visibility On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 08:05:55AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Hi Pengju Jiao, > > The main consume i believe is EC2-API : > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

I think openstack community provides a flat project market place for infrastructure is good enough: all projects are just some "goods" in the market place, let the cloud operators to select projects from the project market place for his own infrastructure. We don't have to mark a project a

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

On Jun 19, 2017, at 5:27 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> It was from the straw man example. Replacing the $FOO_UUID with UUIDs, and >> then stripping out all whitespace resulted in about 1500 bytes. Your >> example, with whitespace included, is 1600 bytes. > > It was the "per

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

On 06/19/2017 05:24 PM, Edward Leafe wrote: On Jun 19, 2017, at 1:34 PM, Jay Pipes > wrote: OK, thanks for clarifying that. When we discussed returning 1.5K per compute host instead of a couple of hundred bytes, there was discussion that paging

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Do we still support core plugin not based on the ML2 framework?

The issue is mainly developer resources. Everyone currently working upstream doesn't have the bandwidth to keep adding/reviewing the layers of interfaces to make the DB optional that go untested. (None of the projects that would use them run a CI system that reports results on Neutron patches.) I

[openstack-dev] [glance] Stepping down from core

Hi there, I've been a Glance core since 2013 and been involved in the Glance community even longer, so I care deeply about Glance. My situation right now is such that I cannot devote sufficient time to Glance, and while as you've seen elsewhere on the mailing list, Glance needs reviewers, I'm

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] A proposal for hackathon to reduce deploy time of TripleO

Reminder: the sprint will start on Wednesday of this week. Actions required: - /join #openstack-sprint - tag relevant bugs in Launchpad to be found on https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bugs?field.tag=deployment-time - create new bugs related to performances and tag them. Anyone is welcome to

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

On Jun 19, 2017, at 1:34 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> OK, thanks for clarifying that. When we discussed returning 1.5K per compute >> host instead of a couple of hundred bytes, there was discussion that paging >> would be necessary. > > Not sure where you're getting the whole

[openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] Next bug triages

Hello everyone, I won't be able to hold the bug triage meeting for OpenStack-Ansible, this week and next week. I'd be super happy if someone could replace me. On top of that, I suggest to cancel the bug triage for the 4th of July. Thank you for your help/understanding! Best regards,

Re: [openstack-dev] [trove][all][tc] A proposal to rearchitect Trove

Amrith, Some good thoughts in your email. I've replied to a few specific pieces below. Overall I think it's a good start to a plan. On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 5:35 AM, Amrith Kumar wrote: > Trove has evolved rapidly over the past several years, since integration > in

Re: [openstack-dev] [trove][all][tc] A proposal to rearchitect Trove

Thanks for starting this difficult discussion. I think I agree with all the lessons learned except the nova one. while you can treat containers and vm's the same, after years of using both, I really don't think its a good idea to treat them equally. Containers can't work properly if used as a

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

On 06/19/2017 01:59 PM, Edward Leafe wrote: While we discussed the fact that there may be a lot of entries, we did not say we'd immediately support a paging mechanism. OK, thanks for clarifying that. When we discussed returning 1.5K per compute host instead of a couple of hundred bytes, there

[openstack-dev] [ironic] this week's priorities and subteam reports

Hi, We are glad to present this week's priorities and subteam report for Ironic. As usual, this is pulled directly from the Ironic whiteboard[0] and formatted. This Week's Priorities (as of the weekly ironic meeting) 1. booting from

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

On Jun 19, 2017, at 9:17 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: As Matt pointed out, I mis-wrote when I said “current flow”. I meant “current agreed-to design flow”. So no need to rehash that. >> * Placement returns a number of these data structures as JSON blobs. Due to >> the size of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [swift] Optimizing storage for small objects in Swift

Excerpts from Alexandre Lécuyer's message of 2017-06-19 11:36:15 +0200: > Hello Clint, > > Thanks for your feedback, replying in the email inline. > > On 06/16/2017 10:54 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > Excerpts from John Dickinson's message of 2017-06-16 11:35:39 -0700: > >> On 16 Jun 2017, at

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-docs] [openstack-docs][dev][all] Documentation repo freeze

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:56:35 + Alexandra Settle wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As of today - Monday, the 19th of June – please do NOT merge any patches into > the openstack-manuals repository that is not related to the topic: > “doc-migration”. > > We are currently in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc][glance] Glance needs help, it's getting critical

On 19/06/17 11:33 -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: [snip] Who else would like to volunteer to help? The help needed is not so much on fixing bugs but rather reviewing the patches that fix bugs and help moving the release forward. I hope the community will grow soonish so that we can go back to the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc][glance] Glance needs help, it's getting critical

[snip] > Who else would like to volunteer to help? > > The help needed is not so much on fixing bugs but rather reviewing the patches > that fix bugs and help moving the release forward. I hope the community will > grow soonish so that we can go back to the regular core team. > > Flavio > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [swift] Optimizing storage for small objects in Swift

Hello John, Thanks for your comments! Replying inline On 06/16/2017 07:06 PM, John Dickinson wrote: Alex, this is fantastic work and great info. Thanks for sharing it. Additional comments inline. On 16 Jun 2017, at 6:54, Alexandre Lécuyer wrote: Swift stores objects on a regular filesystem

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

On 06/16/2017 02:57 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: On Thu, Jun 15 2017, Doug Hellmann wrote: One of the *most* common complaints the TC gets from outside the contributor community is that people do not understand what projects are part of OpenStack and what parts are not. We have a clear definition

[openstack-dev] [openstack-docs][dev][all] Documentation repo freeze

Hi everyone, As of today - Monday, the 19th of June – please do NOT merge any patches into the openstack-manuals repository that is not related to the topic: “doc-migration”. We are currently in the phase of setting up for our MASSIVE migration and we need to ensure that there will be minimal

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

On 19/06/17 16:11, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 06/16/2017 05:18 AM, Graham Hayes wrote: >> On 15/06/17 22:35, Ed Leafe wrote: >>> On Jun 15, 2017, at 3:35 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >>> For me it's one of the most annoying yet challenging/interesting aspects: free software

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

> On Jun 15, 2017, at 5:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Sean Dague wrote: >> [...] >> I think those are all fine. The other term that popped into my head was >> "Friends of OpenStack" as a way to describe the openstack-hosted efforts >> that aren't official projects. It

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

On 06/16/2017 05:18 AM, Graham Hayes wrote: On 15/06/17 22:35, Ed Leafe wrote: On Jun 15, 2017, at 3:35 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: For me it's one of the most annoying yet challenging/interesting aspects: free software development is as much about community and politics as

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

On 6/17/2017 10:55 AM, Jay Bryant wrote: I am responding under Tim's note because I think it gets at what we really want to communicate and takes me to what we have presented in OUI. We have Core OpenStack Projects and then a whole community of additional projects that support cloud

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] nominating Abhishek Kekane for glance core

On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Brian Rosmaita wrote: > I'm nominating Abhishek Kekane (abhishekk on IRC) to be a Glance core > for the Pike cycle. Abhishek has been around the Glance community for > a long time and is familiar with the architecture and design

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

On 6/19/2017 9:17 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 06/19/2017 09:04 AM, Edward Leafe wrote: Current flow: As noted in the nova-scheduler meeting this morning, this should have been called "original plan" rather than "current flow", as Jay pointed out inline. * Scheduler gets a req spec from

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

On 06/19/2017 09:04 AM, Edward Leafe wrote: Current flow: * Scheduler gets a req spec from conductor, containing resource requirements * Scheduler sends those requirements to placement * Placement runs a query to determine the root RPs that can satisfy those requirements Not root RPs.

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] [ec2-api]How about using boto3instead ofboto in requirements

Hi Dims, I got response from core member of ec2-api. What do you think about it? -- Hi, I don't treat adding new library as a problem. - I see that you don't remove boto - so your change doesn't affect ec2-api code. - boto doesn't require botocore and jmespath

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][qa][glance] some recent tempest problems

On 6/16/2017 8:58 AM, Eric Harney wrote: I'm not convinced yet that this failure is purely Ceph-specific, at a quick look. I think what happens here is, unshelve performs an asynchronous delete of a glance image, and returns as successful before the delete has necessarily completed. The check

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment][kolla][openstack-ansible][openstack-helm][tripleo] ansible role to produce oslo.config files for openstack services

Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-06-16 15:50:54 -0700: > So I'm trying to figure out how to actually use it. > > We (and any other container based deploy..) will run into some > chicken/egg problem - you need to deploy container to generate big > yaml with defaults, then you

[openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

There is a lot going on lately in placement-land, and some of the changes being proposed are complex enough that it is difficult to understand what the final result is supposed to look like. I have documented my understanding of the current way that the placement/scheduler interaction works,

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][glance][nova][neutron][horizon][cinder][osc][swift][manila][telemetry][heat][ptls][all][tc][docs] Documentation migration spec

Hi everyone, Doug has been working hard in my absence to answer everyone’s questions and concerns on the migration spec. Thanks to all that have taken the time to review. Due to our limited time frame, we are now looking for the PTLs to provide their respective +1’s (or -1’s) on the patch.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc][glance] Glance needs help, it's getting critical

On 13/06/17 09:50 -0500, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 13/06/17 10:49 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: Quick attempt at a summary of the discussion so far, with my questions: * Short-term, Glance needs help to stay afloat - Sean volunteered to help - but glance needs to add core reviewers to get stuff

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] [ec2-api]How about using boto3instead ofboto in requirements

Add core members of ec2-api to cc list. Pengju Jiao mail: jiaopen...@cmss.chinamobile.com 原始邮件 发件人:jiaopengjujiaopen...@cmss.chinamobile.com 收件人:OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org 抄送:mthodemth...@mthode.org; seans...@dague.net

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] [ec2-api]How about using boto3 instead ofboto in requirements

Thanks, I will try to reach out them in ec2-api channel. Pengju Jiao mail: jiaopen...@cmss.chinamobile.com Hi Pengju Jiao, The main consume i believe is EC2-API : http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=%5Ebotoi=nopefiles=.*req.*%5C.txtrepos=

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

On 19/06/17 07:32 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote: >> as an aside, in telemetry project, we did something somewhat similar >> when we renamed/rebranded to telemetry from ceilometer. we wrote several >> notes to the ML, had a few blog posts, fixed the docs, mentioned the new >> project structure in our

Re: [openstack-dev] [devstack] etcd v3.2.0?

Tony, On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 08:19:16PM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > >> Awesome! thanks Tony, some kolla jobs do that for example, but i think >> this job is a better one to key off of: >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] How about using boto3 instead of boto in requirements

Hi Pengju Jiao, The main consume i believe is EC2-API : http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=%5Eboto=nope=.*req.*%5C.txt= http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=%5E(from%7Cimport).*boto=nope== Can you please reach out to them? Thanks, Dims On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:11 AM, jiaopengju

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

On 16/06/17 04:32 +, gordon chung wrote: On 15/06/17 06:28 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: i see, so this is less an existential question of 'what is openstack' > and more 'how to differentiate governance projects from a random repo > created last weekend' > > this might have been just me, but

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Moving away from "big tent" terminology

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 4:45 PM Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-06-15 11:15:36 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: > [...] > > I'd like to propose that we introduce a new concept: "OpenStack-Hosted > > projects". There would be "OpenStack projects" on one side, and > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [l2gw] DSVM gates for networking-l2gw

Hello, The dummy driver allows you to make writes/reads from the database and that's something we should be continuously testing. I think you cannot achieve that mocking the API calls. Cheers On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Daniel Mellado wrote: > Hi Ricardo, >

Re: [openstack-dev] [l2gw] How to handle correctly unknown-dst traffic

Hello, I try again. Any l2gw plugin user that wants to comment on my email ? thank you Saverio On 29/05/17 16:54, Saverio Proto wrote: > Hello, > > I have a question about the l2gw. I did a deployment, I described the > steps here: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453209/ > > The unicast

Re: [openstack-dev] [swift] Optimizing storage for small objects in Swift

Hello Clint, Thanks for your feedback, replying in the email inline. On 06/16/2017 10:54 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from John Dickinson's message of 2017-06-16 11:35:39 -0700: On 16 Jun 2017, at 10:51, Clint Byrum wrote: This is great work. I'm sure you've already thought of this, but

Re: [openstack-dev] [trove][all][tc] A proposal to rearchitect Trove

Amrith Kumar wrote: > [...] > An important aspect of making this proposal work is that we seek to > eliminate the effort (planning, and coding) involved in migrating > existing Trove v1 deployments to the proposed Trove v2. Effectively, > with work beginning on Trove v2 as proposed here, Trove v1

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Do we still support core plugin not based on the ML2 framework?

Oops, sent too fast, sorry. I try again. Hi, Since Mitaka release, a default service plugins list is loaded when Neutron server starts [1]. That list is not editable and was extended with few services [2]. But all of them rely on the Neutron DB model. If a core driver is not based on the ML2

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Do we still support core plugin not based on the ML2 framework?

Hi, Since Mitaka release [1], a default service plugins list is loaded when Neutron server starts. That list is not editable and was extended with few services [2]. But none of th [1]

[openstack-dev] [nova] notification update week 25

Hi, Here is the status update / focus setting mail about notification work for week 25. Bugs [Undecided] https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1684860 Versioned server notifications don't include updated_at Takashi proposed the fix https://review.openstack.org/#/c/475276/ that looks

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] tempest failures when deploying neutron-server in wsgi with apache

+1 From: Kevin Benton Reply-To: OpenStack List Date: Monday, June 19, 2017 at 10:33 AM To: OpenStack List Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] tempest failures when deploying neutron-server in wsgi with

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] tempest failures when deploying neutron-server in wsgi with apache

Thanks. Maybe this would be a good opportunity to just have people start putting everything in neutron.conf if they want to switch to wsgi. On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:21 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:09:12AM -0700, Kevin Benton wrote: > > I've

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] security group OVO change

Sorry for being vague – have been debugging. We overwrite the base method: with db_api.context_manager.writer.using(context): secgroup_db = ( super(NsxV3Plugin, self).create_security_group( context,

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] tempest failures when deploying neutron-server in wsgi with apache

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:09:12AM -0700, Kevin Benton wrote: > I've been working on Victor's patch a bit. One thing that isn't clear to me > is how we can get the neutron.conf options loaded when using WSGI. How are > other projects doing this? Most projects are using a default location, for

[openstack-dev] [requirements] How about using boto3 instead of boto in requirements

Hi, everyone: I have a blueprint of freezer to support s3 storage driver [1], so I need to add boto3 to the requirements [2]. Why use boto3 but not boto? Boto3 [3] isthe next version of Boto, is now stable and recommended for general use. It can be used side-by-side with Boto in the same

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] tempest failures when deploying neutron-server in wsgi with apache

I've been working on Victor's patch a bit. One thing that isn't clear to me is how we can get the neutron.conf options loaded when using WSGI. How are other projects doing this? On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Morales,

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] security group OVO change

Do you mean the callback event for AFTER_CREATE is missing the rules when it's for default security groups? On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 4:44 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: > Hi, > That patch looks good. We still have an issue in that the create security > groups does not return the list

[openstack-dev] How about using boto3 instead of boto in requirements

Hi, everyone: I have a blueprint of freezer to support s3 storage driver [1], so I need to add boto3 to the requirements [2]. Why use boto3 but not boto? Boto3 [3] isthe next version of Boto, is now stable and recommended for general use. It can be used side-by-side with Boto in the same