On 19 January 2016 at 23:11, Steve Martinelli <steve...@ca.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hmm, looking at: > https://github.com/openstack/keystonemiddleware/compare/4.0.0...4.1.0 the > only change that I can think of that might be the culprit is: > https://github.com/openstack/keystonemiddleware/commit/f27d7f776e8556d976f75d07c99373455106de52 > > I'll dig into this some more soon, but it might be worth trying things out > with that commit reverted. > Unfortunately patch [1] didn't have any effect. So I am trying with [2]. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270024/ [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270417/ > > > stevemar > > [image: Inactive hide details for "Armando M." ---2016/01/20 01:59:44 > AM---On 19 January 2016 at 22:46, Kevin Benton <blak...@gmail.com]"Armando > M." ---2016/01/20 01:59:44 AM---On 19 January 2016 at 22:46, Kevin Benton < > blak...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > From: "Armando M." <arma...@gmail.com> > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: 2016/01/20 01:59 AM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][neutron][requirements] - > keystonemiddleware-4.1.0 performance regression > ------------------------------ > > > > > > On 19 January 2016 at 22:46, Kevin Benton <*blak...@gmail.com* > <blak...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > We noticed a major jump in the neutron tempest and API test run times > recently in Neutron. After digging through logstash I found out that it > first occurred on the requirements bump here: > *https://review.openstack.org/#/c/265697/* > <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/265697/> > > After locally testing each requirements change individually, I found > that the keystonemiddleware change seems to be the culprit. It almost > doubles the time it takes to fulfill simple port-list requests in Neutron. > > Armando pushed up a patch here to confirm: > *https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270024/* > <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270024/> > Once that's verified, we should probably put a cap on the middleware > because it's causing the tests to run up close to their time limits. > > > Kevin, > > As usual your analytical skills are to be praised. > > I wonder if anyone else is aware of the issue/s, because during the usual > hunting I could see other projects being affected and showing abnormally > high run times of the dsvm jobs. > > I am not sure that [1] is the right approach, but it should give us some > data points if executed successfully. > > Cheers, > Armando > > [1] *https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270024/* > <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270024/> > > > -- > Kevin Benton > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: > *openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe* > <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe> > *http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev* > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
