[openstack-dev] Networks Generating In Fuel
Hi! I'm now developing in Fuel and I want to add a virtual ip address to the NIC of br-ex with the same ip range of public address. So I want to know where IPs of node's such as br-ex, br-storage are generated. Can you tell me ? Mail:zh...@certusnet.com.cn ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Compute agent local VM inspector - potential enhancement
Disclaimer: I'm not fully vested on ceilometer internals, so bear with me. For consumers wanting to leverage ceilometer as a telemetry service atop non-OpenStack Clouds or infrastructure they don't own, some edge cases crop up. Most notably the consumer may not have access to the hypervisor host and therefore cannot leverage the ceilometer compute agent on a per host basis. Yes, currently such access to the hypervisor host is required, least in the case of the libvirt-based inspector. In such scenarios it's my understanding the main option is to employ the central agent to poll measurements from the monitored resources (VMs, etc.). Well, the ceilometer central agent is not generally concerned with with polling related *directly* to VMs - rather it handles acquiring data from RESTful API (glance, neutron etc.) that are not otherwise available in the form of notifications, and also from host-level interfaces such as SNMP. However this approach requires Cloud APIs (or other mechanisms) which allow the polling impl to obtain the desired measurements (VM memory, CPU, net stats, etc.) and moreover the polling approach has it's own set of pros / cons from a arch / topology perspective. Indeed. The other potential option is to setup the ceilometer compute agent within the VM and have each VM publish measurements to the collector -- a local VM agent / inspector if you will. With respect to this local VM agent approach: (a) I haven't seen this documented to date; is there any desire / reqs to support this topology? (b) If yes to #a, I whipped up a crude PoC here: http://tinyurl.com/pqjgotv Are folks willing to consider a BP for this approach? So in a sense this is similar to the Heat cfn-push-stats utility[1] and seems to suffer from the same fundamental problem, i.e. the need for injection of credentials (user/passwds, keys, whatever) into the VM in order to allow the metric datapoints be pushed up to the infrastructure layer (e.g. onto the AMQP bus, or to a REST API endpoint). How would you propose to solve that credentialing issue? Cheers, Eoghan [1] https://github.com/openstack/heat-cfntools/blob/master/bin/cfn-push-stats ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] tox -e pep8 fails at requirements.txt
Hi - When I run tox to check pep8 on the newly cloned neutron from openstack git , I get the following error. pep8 create: /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8 pep8 installdeps: -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt, -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt ERROR: invocation failed, logfile: /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/log/pep8-1.log ERROR: actionid=pep8 msg=getenv cmdargs=[local('/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/bin/pip'), 'install', '-U', '-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt', '-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt'] env={'PYTHONIOENCODING': 'utf_8', 'XDG_RUNTIME_DIR': '/run/user/0', 'VIRTUAL_ENV': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8', 'LESSOPEN': '| /usr/bin/lesspipe %s', 'SSH_CLIENT': '10.232.84.77 61736 22', 'LOGNAME': 'root', 'USER': 'root', 'HOME': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/tmp/pseudo-home', 'PATH': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/games:/usr/local/games', 'XDG_SESSION_ID': '19', '_': '/usr/bin/tox', 'SSH_CONNECTION': '10.232.84.77 61736 10.232.90.26 22', 'LANG': 'en_IN', 'TERM': 'xterm', 'SHELL': '/bin/bash', 'LESSCLOSE': '/usr/bin/lesspipe %s %s', 'LANGUAGE': 'en_IN:en', 'SHLVL': '1', 'SSH_TTY': '/dev/pts/0', 'OLDPWD': '/root/fw_code_base', 'PWD': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014', 'PYTHONHASHSEED': '0', 'MAIL': '/var/mail/root', 'LS_COLORS': 'rs=0:di=01;34:ln=01;36:mh=00:pi=40;33:so=01;35:do=01;35:bd=40;33;01:cd=40;33;01:or=40;31;01:su=37;41:sg=30;43:ca=30;41:tw=30;42:ow=34;42:st=37;44:ex=01;32:*.tar=01;31:*.tgz=01;31:*.arj=01;31:*.taz=01;31:*.lzh=01;31:*.lzma=01;31:*.tlz=01;31:*.txz=01;31:*.zip=01;31:*.z=01;31:*.Z=01;31:*.dz=01;31:*.gz=01;31:*.lz=01;31:*.xz=01;31:*.bz2=01;31:*.bz=01;31:*.tbz=01;31:*.tbz2=01;31:*.tz=01;31:*.deb=01;31:*.rpm=01;31:*.jar=01;31:*.war=01;31:*.ear=01;31:*.sar=01;31:*.rar=01;31:*.ace=01;31:*.zoo=01;31:*.cpio=01;31:*.7z=01;31:*.rz=01;31:*.jpg=01;35:*.jpeg=01;35:*.gif=01;35:*.bmp=01;35:*.pbm=01;35:*.pgm=01;35:*.ppm=01;35:*.tga=01;35:*.xbm=01;35:*.xpm=01;35:*.tif=01;35:*.tiff=01;35:*.png=01;35:*.svg=01;35:*.svgz=01;35:*.mng=01;35:*.pcx=01;35:*.mov=01;35:*.mpg=01;35:*.mpeg=01;35:*.m2v=01;35:*.mkv=01;35:*.webm=01;35:*.ogm=01;35:*.mp4=01;35:*.m4v=01;35:*.mp4v=01;35:*.vob=01;35:*.qt=01;35:*.nuv=01;35:*.wmv=01;35:*.asf=01;35:*.rm=01;35:*.rmvb=01;35:*.flc=01;35:*.avi=01;35:*.fli=01;35:*.flv=01;35:*.gl=01;35:*.dl=01;35:*.xcf=01;35:*.xwd=01;35:*.yuv=01;35:*.cgm=01;35:*.emf=01;35:*.axv=01;35:*.anx=01;35:*.ogv=01;35:*.ogx=01;35:*.aac=00;36:*.au=00;36:*.flac=00;36:*.mid=00;36:*.midi=00;36:*.mka=00;36:*.mp3=00;36:*.mpc=00;36:*.ogg=00;36:*.ra=00;36:*.wav=00;36:*.axa=00;36:*.oga=00;36:*.spx=00;36:*.xspf=00;36:'} Downloading/unpacking pbr=0.6,!=0.7,1.0 (from -r /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt (line 1)) Cannot fetch index base URL https://pypi.python.org/simple/ Could not find any downloads that satisfy the requirement pbr=0.6,!=0.7,1.0 (from -r /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt (line 1)) Cleaning up... No distributions at all found for pbr=0.6,!=0.7,1.0 (from -r /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt (line 1)) Storing debug log for failure in /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/tmp/pseudo-home/.pip/pip.log ERROR: could not install deps [-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt, -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt] __ summary __ ERROR: pep8: could not install deps [-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt, -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt] Can anyone help me on resolving this issue. Kindly please help me in this regard. Thanks in advance. -- Trinath Somanchi - B39208 trinath.soman...@freescale.com | extn: 4048 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Marconi] All-hands documentation day
On 07/31/2014 09:57 PM, Victoria Martínez de la Cruz wrote: Hi everyone, Earlier today I went through the documentation requirements for graduation [0] and it looks like there is some work do to. The structure we should follow is detailed in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/marconi-graduation. It would be nice to do an all-hands documentation day next week to make this happen. Can you join us? When is it better for you? Hey Vicky, Awesome work, thanks for putting this together. I'd propose doing it on Thursday since, hopefully, some other patches will land during that week that will require documentation too. Flavio, My best, Victoria [0] https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/incubation-integration-requirements.rst#documentation--user-support-1 -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Compute agent local VM inspector - potential enhancement
Heat cfntools is based on SSH, so I assume it requires TCP/IP connectivity between VM and the central agent(or collector). But in the cloud, some networks are isolated from infrastructure layer network, because of security reasons. Some of our customers even explicitly require such security protection. Does it mean those isolated VMs cannot be monitored by this proposed-VM-agent? I really wish we can figur out how it could work for all VMs but with no security issues. I'm not familiar with heat-cfntools, so, correct me if I am wrong :) Best regards! Kurt -邮件原件- 发件人: Eoghan Glynn [mailto:egl...@redhat.com] 发送时间: 2014年8月1日 14:46 收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 主题: Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Compute agent local VM inspector - potential enhancement Disclaimer: I'm not fully vested on ceilometer internals, so bear with me. For consumers wanting to leverage ceilometer as a telemetry service atop non-OpenStack Clouds or infrastructure they don't own, some edge cases crop up. Most notably the consumer may not have access to the hypervisor host and therefore cannot leverage the ceilometer compute agent on a per host basis. Yes, currently such access to the hypervisor host is required, least in the case of the libvirt-based inspector. In such scenarios it's my understanding the main option is to employ the central agent to poll measurements from the monitored resources (VMs, etc.). Well, the ceilometer central agent is not generally concerned with with polling related *directly* to VMs - rather it handles acquiring data from RESTful API (glance, neutron etc.) that are not otherwise available in the form of notifications, and also from host-level interfaces such as SNMP. However this approach requires Cloud APIs (or other mechanisms) which allow the polling impl to obtain the desired measurements (VM memory, CPU, net stats, etc.) and moreover the polling approach has it's own set of pros / cons from a arch / topology perspective. Indeed. The other potential option is to setup the ceilometer compute agent within the VM and have each VM publish measurements to the collector -- a local VM agent / inspector if you will. With respect to this local VM agent approach: (a) I haven't seen this documented to date; is there any desire / reqs to support this topology? (b) If yes to #a, I whipped up a crude PoC here: http://tinyurl.com/pqjgotv Are folks willing to consider a BP for this approach? So in a sense this is similar to the Heat cfn-push-stats utility[1] and seems to suffer from the same fundamental problem, i.e. the need for injection of credentials (user/passwds, keys, whatever) into the VM in order to allow the metric datapoints be pushed up to the infrastructure layer (e.g. onto the AMQP bus, or to a REST API endpoint). How would you propose to solve that credentialing issue? Cheers, Eoghan [1] https://github.com/openstack/heat-cfntools/blob/master/bin/cfn-push-stats ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] tox -e pep8 fails at requirements.txt
Hi, It seems like pypi was not reachable at that moment. You could be behind a proxy. You can try at a later time. It should work. Cheers, Ajaya On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:29 PM, trinath.soman...@freescale.com trinath.soman...@freescale.com wrote: Hi – When I run tox to check pep8 on the newly cloned neutron from openstack git , I get the following error. pep8 create: /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8 pep8 installdeps: -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt, -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt ERROR: invocation failed, logfile: /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/log/pep8-1.log ERROR: actionid=pep8 msg=getenv cmdargs=[local('/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/bin/pip'), 'install', '-U', '-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt', '-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt'] env={'PYTHONIOENCODING': 'utf_8', 'XDG_RUNTIME_DIR': '/run/user/0', 'VIRTUAL_ENV': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8', 'LESSOPEN': '| /usr/bin/lesspipe %s', 'SSH_CLIENT': '10.232.84.77 61736 22', 'LOGNAME': 'root', 'USER': 'root', 'HOME': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/tmp/pseudo-home', 'PATH': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/games:/usr/local/games', 'XDG_SESSION_ID': '19', '_': '/usr/bin/tox', 'SSH_CONNECTION': '10.232.84.77 61736 10.232.90.26 22', 'LANG': 'en_IN', 'TERM': 'xterm', 'SHELL': '/bin/bash', 'LESSCLOSE': '/usr/bin/lesspipe %s %s', 'LANGUAGE': 'en_IN:en', 'SHLVL': '1', 'SSH_TTY': '/dev/pts/0', 'OLDPWD': '/root/fw_code_base', 'PWD': '/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014', 'PYTHONHASHSEED': '0', 'MAIL': '/var/mail/root', 'LS_COLORS': 'rs=0:di=01;34:ln=01;36:mh=00:pi=40;33:so=01;35:do=01;35:bd=40;33;01:cd=40;33;01:or=40;31;01:su=37;41:sg=30;43:ca=30;41:tw=30;42:ow=34;42:st=37;44:ex=01;32:*.tar=01;31:*.tgz=01;31:*.arj=01;31:*.taz=01;31:*.lzh=01;31:*.lzma=01;31:*.tlz=01;31:*.txz=01;31:*.zip=01;31:*.z=01;31:*.Z=01;31:*.dz=01;31:*.gz=01;31:*.lz=01;31:*.xz=01;31:*.bz2=01;31:*.bz=01;31:*.tbz=01;31:*.tbz2=01;31:*.tz=01;31:*.deb=01;31:*.rpm=01;31:*.jar=01;31:*.war=01;31:*.ear=01;31:*.sar=01;31:*.rar=01;31:*.ace=01;31:*.zoo=01;31:*.cpio=01;31:*.7z=01;31:*.rz=01;31:*.jpg=01;35:*.jpeg=01;35:*.gif=01;35:*.bmp=01;35:*.pbm=01;35:*.pgm=01;35:*.ppm=01;35:*.tga=01;35:*.xbm=01;35:*.xpm=01;35:*.tif=01;35:*.tiff=01;35:*.png=01;35:*.svg=01;35:*.svgz=01;35:*.mng=01;35:*.pcx=01;35:*.mov=01;35:*.mpg=01;35:*.mpeg=01;35:*.m2v=01;35:*.mkv=01;35:*.webm=01;35:*.ogm=01;35:*.mp4=01;35:*.m4v=01;35:*.mp4v=01;35:*.vob=01;35:*.qt=01;35:*.nuv=01;35:*.wmv=01;35:*.asf=01;35:*.rm=01;35:*.rmvb=01;35:*.flc=01;35:*.avi=01;35:*.fli=01;35:*.flv=01;35:*.gl=01;35:*.dl=01;35:*.xcf=01;35:*.xwd=01;35:*.yuv=01;35:*.cgm=01;35:*.emf=01;35:*.axv=01;35:*.anx=01;35:*.ogv=01;35:*.ogx=01;35:*.aac=00;36:*.au=00;36:*.flac=00;36:*.mid=00;36:*.midi=00;36:*.mka=00;36:*.mp3=00;36:*.mpc=00;36:*.ogg=00;36:*.ra=00;36:*.wav=00;36:*.axa=00;36:*.oga=00;36:*.spx=00;36:*.xspf=00;36:'} Downloading/unpacking pbr=0.6,!=0.7,1.0 (from -r /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt (line 1)) Cannot fetch index base URL https://pypi.python.org/simple/ Could not find any downloads that satisfy the requirement pbr=0.6,!=0.7,1.0 (from -r /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt (line 1)) Cleaning up... No distributions at all found for pbr=0.6,!=0.7,1.0 (from -r /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt (line 1)) Storing debug log for failure in /root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/.tox/pep8/tmp/pseudo-home/.pip/pip.log ERROR: could not install deps [-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt, -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt] __ summary __ ERROR: pep8: could not install deps [-r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/requirements.txt, -r/root/fw_code_base/neutron_01082014/test-requirements.txt] Can anyone help me on resolving this issue. Kindly please help me in this regard. Thanks in advance. -- Trinath Somanchi - B39208 trinath.soman...@freescale.com | extn: 4048 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Strategy for merging Heat HOT port
Hello, yes, this is a very needed change, so I'd vote for -2 everything unless it's rebased to 105347. Thank you for the patches. Ladislav On 08/01/2014 02:19 AM, Steve Baker wrote: The changes to port tripleo-heat-templates to HOT have been rebased to the current state and are ready to review. They are the next steps in blueprint tripleo-juno-remove-mergepy. However there is coordination needed to merge since every existing tripleo-heat-templates change will need to be rebased and changed after the port lands (lucky you!). Here is a summary of the important changes in the series: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105327/ Low risk and plenty of +2s, just needs enough validation from CI for an approve https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105328/ Scripted conversion to HOT. Converts everything except Fn::Select https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105347/ Manual conversion of Fn::Select to extended get_attr I'd like to suggest the following approach for getting these to land: * Any changes which really should land before the above 3 get listed in this mail thread (vlan?) * Reviews of the above 3 changes, and local testing of change 105347 * All other tripleo-heat-templates need to be rebased/reworked to be after 105347 (and maybe -2 until they are?) I'm available for any questions on porting your changes to HOT. cheers ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Congress] data-source renovation
Option 2 looks like a better idea keeping in mind the data model consistency with Neutron/Nova. Could we write something similar to a view which becomes a layer on top if this data model? On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Tim Hinrichs thinri...@vmware.com wrote: Hi all, As I mentioned in a previous IRC, when writing our first few policies I had trouble using the tables we currently use to represent external data sources like Nova/Neutron. The main problem is that wide tables (those with many columns) are hard to use. (a) it is hard to remember what all the columns are, (b) it is easy to mistakenly use the same variable in two different tables in the body of the rule, i.e. to create an accidental join, (c) changes to the datasource drivers can require tedious/error-prone modifications to policy. I see several options. Once we choose something, I’ll write up a spec and include the other options as alternatives. 1) Add a preprocessor to the policy engine that makes it easier to deal with large tables via named-argument references. Instead of writing a rule like p(port_id, name) :- neutron:ports(port_id, addr_pairs, security_groups, extra_dhcp_opts, binding_cap, status, name, admin_state_up, network_id, tenant_id, binding_vif, device_owner, mac_address, fixed_ips, router_id, binding_host) we would write p(id, nme) :- neutron:ports(port_id=id, name=nme) The preprocessor would fill in all the missing variables and hand the original rule off to the Datalog engine. Pros: (i) leveraging vanilla database technology under the hood (ii) policy is robust to changes in the fields of the original data b/c the Congress data model is different than the Nova/Neutron data models Cons: (i) we will need to invert the preprocessor when showing rules/traces/etc. to the user (ii) a layer of translation makes debugging difficult 2) Be disciplined about writing narrow tables and write tutorials/recommendations demonstrating how. Instead of a table like... neutron:ports(port_id, addr_pairs, security_groups, extra_dhcp_opts, binding_cap, status, name, admin_state_up, network_id, tenant_id, binding_vif, device_owner, mac_address, fixed_ips, router_id, binding_host) we would have many tables... neutron:ports(port_id) neutron:ports.addr_pairs(port_id, addr_pairs) neutron:ports.security_groups(port_id, security_groups) neutron:ports.extra_dhcp_opts(port_id, extra_dhcp_opts) neutron:ports.name(port_id, name) ... People writing policy would write rules such as ... p(x) :- neutron:ports.name(port, name), ... [Here, the period e.g. in ports.name is not an operator--just a convenient way to spell the tablename.] To do this, Congress would need to know which columns in a table are sufficient to uniquely identify a row, which in most cases is just the ID. Pros: (i) this requires only changes in the datasource drivers; everything else remains the same (ii) still leveraging database technology under the hood (iii) policy is robust to changes in fields of original data Cons: (i) datasource driver can force policy writer to use wide tables (ii) this data model is much different than the original data models (iii) we need primary-key information about tables 3) Enhance the Congress policy language to handle objects natively. Instead of writing a rule like the following ... p(port_id, name, group) :- neutron:ports(port_id, addr_pairs, security_groups, extra_dhcp_opts, binding_cap, status, name, admin_state_up, network_id, tenant_id, binding_vif, device_owner, mac_address, fixed_ips, router_id, binding_host), neutron:ports.security_groups(security_group, group) we would write a rule such as p(port_id, name) :- neutron:ports(port), port.name(name), port.id(port_id), port.security_groups(group) The big difference here is that the period (.) is an operator in the language, just as in C++/Java. Pros: (i) The data model we use in Congress is almost exactly the same as the data model we use in Neutron/Nova. (ii) Policy is robust to changes in the Neutron/Nova data model as long as those changes only ADD fields. (iii) Programmers may be slightly more comfortable with this language. Cons: (i) The obvious implementation (changing the engine to implement the (.) operator directly is quite a change from traditional database technology. At this point, that seems risky. (ii) It is unclear how to implement this via a preprocessor (thereby leveraging database technology). The key problem I see is that we would need to translate port.name(...) into something like option (2) above. The difficulty is that TABLE could sometimes be a port, sometimes be a network, sometimes be a subnet, etc. (iii) Requires some extra syntactic restrictions to ensure we don't lose decidability. (iv) Because the Congress and Nova/Neutron models are the same, changes to the Nova/Neutron model can
[openstack-dev] how and which tempest tests to run
I deployed a single node devstack on Ubuntu 14.04. This devstack belongs to Juno. I have written a cinder-volume driver for my client backend. I want to contribute this driver in Juno release. As i analyzed the contribution process,it is telling to run tempest tests for Continuous Integration. Could any one tell me how and which tempest tests to run on this devstack deployment for cinder volume driver? Also tempest has many test cases.Do i have to pass all tests for contribution of my driver? Also am i missing any thing thing in below local.conf? *Below are steps for my devstack deployment:* 1) git clone https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack.git 2)cd devstack 3)vi local.conf [[local|localrc]] ADMIN_PASSWORD=some_password DATABASE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD RABBIT_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_TOKEN=ADMIN FLAT_INTERFACE=eth0 FIXED_RANGE=192.168.2.80/29 #FLOATING_RANGE=192.168.20.0/25 HOST_IP=192.168.2.64 LOGFILE=$DEST/logs/stack.sh.log SCREEN_LOGDIR=$DEST/logs/screen SYSLOG=True SYSLOG_HOST=$HOST_IP SYSLOG_PORT=516 RECLONE=yes CINDER_ENABLED_BACKENDS=client:client_driver TEMPEST_VOLUME_DRIVER=client_iscsi TEMPEST_VOLUME_VENDOR=CLIENT TEMPEST_STORAGE_PROTOCOL=iSCSI VOLUME_BACKING_FILE_SIZE=20G [[post-config|$CINDER_CONF]] [client_driver] volume_driver=cinder.volume.drivers.san.client.iscsi. client_iscsi.ClientISCSIDriver san_ip = 192.168.2.192 san_login = some_name san_password =some_password client_iscsi_ips = 192.168.2.193 4)./stack.sh ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Compute agent local VM inspector - potential enhancement
Heat cfntools is based on SSH, so I assume it requires TCP/IP connectivity between VM and the central agent(or collector). But in the cloud, some networks are isolated from infrastructure layer network, because of security reasons. Some of our customers even explicitly require such security protection. Does it mean those isolated VMs cannot be monitored by this proposed-VM-agent? Yes, that sounds plausible to me. Cheers, Eoghan I really wish we can figur out how it could work for all VMs but with no security issues. I'm not familiar with heat-cfntools, so, correct me if I am wrong :) Best regards! Kurt -邮件原件- 发件人: Eoghan Glynn [mailto:egl...@redhat.com] 发送时间: 2014年8月1日 14:46 收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 主题: Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Compute agent local VM inspector - potential enhancement Disclaimer: I'm not fully vested on ceilometer internals, so bear with me. For consumers wanting to leverage ceilometer as a telemetry service atop non-OpenStack Clouds or infrastructure they don't own, some edge cases crop up. Most notably the consumer may not have access to the hypervisor host and therefore cannot leverage the ceilometer compute agent on a per host basis. Yes, currently such access to the hypervisor host is required, least in the case of the libvirt-based inspector. In such scenarios it's my understanding the main option is to employ the central agent to poll measurements from the monitored resources (VMs, etc.). Well, the ceilometer central agent is not generally concerned with with polling related *directly* to VMs - rather it handles acquiring data from RESTful API (glance, neutron etc.) that are not otherwise available in the form of notifications, and also from host-level interfaces such as SNMP. However this approach requires Cloud APIs (or other mechanisms) which allow the polling impl to obtain the desired measurements (VM memory, CPU, net stats, etc.) and moreover the polling approach has it's own set of pros / cons from a arch / topology perspective. Indeed. The other potential option is to setup the ceilometer compute agent within the VM and have each VM publish measurements to the collector -- a local VM agent / inspector if you will. With respect to this local VM agent approach: (a) I haven't seen this documented to date; is there any desire / reqs to support this topology? (b) If yes to #a, I whipped up a crude PoC here: http://tinyurl.com/pqjgotv Are folks willing to consider a BP for this approach? So in a sense this is similar to the Heat cfn-push-stats utility[1] and seems to suffer from the same fundamental problem, i.e. the need for injection of credentials (user/passwds, keys, whatever) into the VM in order to allow the metric datapoints be pushed up to the infrastructure layer (e.g. onto the AMQP bus, or to a REST API endpoint). How would you propose to solve that credentialing issue? Cheers, Eoghan [1] https://github.com/openstack/heat-cfntools/blob/master/bin/cfn-push-stats ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Spec exceptions are closed, FPF is August 21
Hi Armando: If a core-reviewer puts a -2, there must be a good reason for it I agree. The problem is that after the initial issue identified in the initial -2 review has been fixed, and the patch updated, it (sometimes) happens that we can not get the original reviewer to re-review that update for weeks - creating the type of issues identified in this thread. I would agree that if this was a one-off scenarios, we should handling this as a specific case as you suggest. Unfortunately, this is not a one-off instance, and hence my request for clearer guidelines from PTL for such cases. Regards, Mandeep On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Armando M. arma...@gmail.com wrote: It is not my intention debating, pointing fingers and finding culprits, these issues can be addressed in some other context. I am gonna say three things: 1) If a core-reviewer puts a -2, there must be a good reason for it. If other reviewers blindly move on as some people seem to imply here, then those reviewers should probably not review the code at all! My policy is to review all the code I am interested in/I can, regardless of the score. My -1 may be someone's +1 (or vice versa), so 'trusting' someone else's vote is the wrong way to go about this. 2) If we all feel that this feature is important (which I am not sure it was being marked as 'low' in oslo, not sure how it was tracked in Neutron), there is the weekly IRC Neutron meeting to raise awareness, since all cores participate; to the best of my knowledge we never spoke (or barely) of the rootwrap work. 3) If people do want this work in Juno (Carl being one of them), we can figure out how to make one final push, and assess potential regression. We 'rushed' other features late in cycle in the past (like nova/neutron event notifications) and if we keep this disabled by default in Juno, I don't think it's really that risky. I can work with Carl to give the patches some more love. Armando On 31 July 2014 15:40, Rudra Rugge ru...@contrailsystems.com wrote: Hi Kyle, I also agree with Mandeep's suggestion of putting a time frame on the lingering -2 if the addressed concerns have been taken care of. In my experience also a sticky -2 detracts other reviewers from reviewing an updated patch. Either a time-frame or a possible override by PTL (move to -1) would help make progress on the review. Regards, Rudra On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Mandeep Dhami dh...@noironetworks.com wrote: Hi Kyle: As -2 is sticky, and as there exists a possibility that the original core might not get time to get back to re-reviewing his, do you think that there should be clearer guidelines on it's usage (to avoid what you identified as dropping of the balls)? Salvatore had a good guidance in a related thread [0], do you agree with something like that? I try to avoid -2s as much as possible. I put a -2 only when I reckon your patch should never be merged because it'll make the software unstable or tries to solve a problem that does not exist. -2s stick across patches and tend to put off other reviewers. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-July/041339.html Or do you think that 3-5 days after an update that addresses the issues identified in the original -2, we should automatically remove that -2? If this does not happen often, this process does not have to be automated, just an exception that the PTL can exercise to address issues where the original reason for -2 has been addressed and nothing new has been identified? On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Yuriy Taraday yorik@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote: and even less possibly rootwrap [3] if the security implications can be worked out. Can you please provide some input on those security implications that are not worked out yet? I'm really surprised to see such comments in some ML thread not directly related to the BP. Why is my spec blocked? Neither spec [1] nor code (which is available for a really long time now [2] [3]) can get enough reviewers' attention because of those groundless -2's. Should I abandon these change requests and file new ones to get some eyes on my code and proposals? It's just getting ridiculous. Let's take a look at timeline, shall we? I share your concerns here as well, and I'm sorry you've had a bad experience working with the community here. Mar, 25 - first version of the first part of Neutron code is published at [2] Mar, 28 - first reviewers come and it gets -1'd by Mark because of lack of BP (thankful it wasn't -2 yet, so reviews continued) Apr, 1 - Both Oslo [5] and Neturon [6] BPs are created; Apr, 2 - first version of the second part of Neutron code is published at [3]; May, 16 - first version of Neutron spec is published at [1]; May, 19
[openstack-dev] [nova] libvirtError: XML error: Missing CPU model name on 2nd level vm
Hi I don't have a real PC to so created a test env ,so I created a 2nd level env (create a kvm virtual machine on top of a physical host then run devstack o the vm) I am not sure whether it's doable because I saw following error when start nova-compute service , is it a bug or I need to update my configuration instead? thanks 2014-08-01 17:04:51.532 DEBUG nova.virt.libvirt.config [-] Generated XML ('cpu\n archx86_64/arch\n topology sockets=1 cores=1 threads=1/\n/cpu\n',) from (pid=16956) to_xml /opt/stack/nova/nova/virt/libvirt/config.py:79 Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/eventlet/hubs/hub.py, line 346, in fire_timers timer() File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/eventlet/hubs/timer.py, line 56, in __call__ cb(*args, **kw) File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/eventlet/event.py, line 163, in _do_send waiter.switch(result) File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/eventlet/greenthread.py, line 194, in main result = function(*args, **kwargs) File /opt/stack/nova/nova/openstack/common/service.py, line 490, in run_service service.start() File /opt/stack/nova/nova/service.py, line 164, in start self.manager.init_host() File /opt/stack/nova/nova/compute/manager.py, line 1055, in init_host self.driver.init_host(host=self.host) File /opt/stack/nova/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py, line 633, in init_host self._do_quality_warnings() File /opt/stack/nova/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py, line 616, in _do_quality_warnings caps = self._get_host_capabilities() File /opt/stack/nova/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py, line 2942, in _get_host_capabilities libvirt.VIR_CONNECT_BASELINE_CPU_EXPAND_FEATURES) File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/eventlet/tpool.py, line 179, in doit result = proxy_call(self._autowrap, f, *args, **kwargs) File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/eventlet/tpool.py, line 139, in proxy_call rv = execute(f,*args,**kwargs) File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/eventlet/tpool.py, line 77, in tworker rv = meth(*args,**kwargs) File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/libvirt.py, line 3127, in baselineCPU if ret is None: raise libvirtError ('virConnectBaselineCPU() failed', conn=self) libvirtError: XML error: Missing CPU model name Best Regards! Kevin (Chen) Ji 纪 晨 Engineer, zVM Development, CSTL Notes: Chen CH Ji/China/IBM@IBMCN Internet: jiche...@cn.ibm.com Phone: +86-10-82454158 Address: 3/F Ring Building, ZhongGuanCun Software Park, Haidian District, Beijing 100193, PRC___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack] Cinder tempest api volume tests failed
Hi Mike,test which is failed for me is: *tempest.api.volume.admin.test_volume_types.VolumeTypesTest* I am getting error in below function call in above test *self.volumes_client.wait_for_volume_status**(volume['id'],* * 'available')**.* This function call is in below function: *@test.attr(type='smoke')* *def test_create_get_delete_volume_with_volume_type_and_extra_specs(self)* I saw in c-sch log and i found this major issue: *2014-08-01 14:08:05.773 11853 ERROR cinder.scheduler.flows.create_volume [req-ceafd00c-30b1-4846-a555-6116556efb3b 43af88811b2243238d3d9fc732731565 a39922e8e5284729b07fcd045cfd5a88 - - -] Failed to run task cinder.scheduler.flows.create_volume.ScheduleCreateVolumeTask;volume:create: No valid host was found. No weighed hosts available* Actually by analyzing the test i found: 1)it is creating a volume-type with extra_specs 2)it is creating a volume with volume type and here it is failing. *Below is my new local.conf file. * *Am i missing anything in this?* [[local|localrc]] ADMIN_PASSWORD=some_password DATABASE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD RABBIT_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_TOKEN=ADMIN FLAT_INTERFACE=eth0 FIXED_RANGE=192.168.2.80/29 HOST_IP=192.168.2.64 LOGFILE=$DEST/logs/stack.sh.log SCREEN_LOGDIR=$DEST/logs/screen SYSLOG=True SYSLOG_HOST=$HOST_IP SYSLOG_PORT=516 RECLONE=yes CINDER_ENABLED_BACKENDS=client:client_driver TEMPEST_VOLUME_DRIVER=client_iscsi TEMPEST_VOLUME_VENDOR=CLIENT TEMPEST_STORAGE_PROTOCOL=iSCSI VOLUME_BACKING_FILE_SIZE=20G [[post-config|$CINDER_CONF]] [client_driver] volume_driver=cinder.volume.drivers.san.client.iscsi.client_iscsi.ClientISCSIDriver san_ip=192.168.2.192 san_login=some_name san_password=some_password client_iscsi_ips = 192.168.2.193 *Below is my cinder.conf:* [keystone_authtoken] auth_uri = http://192.168.2.64:5000/v2.0 signing_dir = /var/cache/cinder admin_password = some_password admin_user = cinder admin_tenant_name = service cafile = identity_uri = http://192.168.2.64:35357 [DEFAULT] rabbit_password = some_password rabbit_hosts = 192.168.2.64 rpc_backend = cinder.openstack.common.rpc.impl_kombu use_syslog = True default_volume_type = client_driver enabled_backends = client_driver enable_v1_api = true periodic_interval = 60 lock_path = /opt/stack/data/cinder state_path = /opt/stack/data/cinder osapi_volume_extension = cinder.api.contrib.standard_extensions rootwrap_config = /etc/cinder/rootwrap.conf api_paste_config = /etc/cinder/api-paste.ini sql_connection = mysql://root:some_password@127.0.0.1/cinder?charset=utf8 iscsi_helper = tgtadm my_ip = 192.168.2.64 verbose = True debug = True auth_strategy = keystone [client_driver] client_iscsi_ips = 192.168.2.193 san_password = !manage san_login = manage san_ip = 192.168.2.192 volume_driver = cinder.volume.drivers.san.client.iscsi.client_iscsi.ClientISCSIDriver Regards Nikesh On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 1:56 AM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote: On 11:30 Thu 31 Jul , Nikesh Kumar Mahalka wrote: I deployed a single node devstack on Ubuntu 14.04. This devstack belongs to Juno. When i am running tempest api volume test, i am getting some tests failed. Hi Nikesh, To further figure out what's wrong, take a look at the c-vol, c-api and c-sch tabs in the stack screen session. If you're unsure where to go from there after looking at the output, set the `SCREEN_LOGDIR` setting in your local.conf [1] and copy the logs from those tabs to paste.openstack.org for us to see. [1] - http://devstack.org/configuration.html -- Mike Perez ___ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openst...@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Strategy for merging Heat HOT port
On 01/08/14 02:19, Steve Baker wrote: The changes to port tripleo-heat-templates to HOT have been rebased to the current state and are ready to review. They are the next steps in blueprint tripleo-juno-remove-mergepy. However there is coordination needed to merge since every existing tripleo-heat-templates change will need to be rebased and changed after the port lands (lucky you!). Here is a summary of the important changes in the series: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105327/ Low risk and plenty of +2s, just needs enough validation from CI for an approve https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105328/ Scripted conversion to HOT. Converts everything except Fn::Select https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105347/ Manual conversion of Fn::Select to extended get_attr I'd like to suggest the following approach for getting these to land: * Any changes which really should land before the above 3 get listed in this mail thread (vlan?) * Reviews of the above 3 changes, and local testing of change 105347 * All other tripleo-heat-templates need to be rebased/reworked to be after 105347 (and maybe -2 until they are?) Agreed to all this. We've done a similar thing for the software config work. I'll try to do a local run of 105347 today. I'm available for any questions on porting your changes to HOT. cheers ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Trove] Backup/restore namespace config move has leftovers
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Mark Kirkwood mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz wrote: In my latest devstack pull I notice that backup_namespace restore_namespace have moved from the default conf group to per datastore (commit 61935d3). However they still appear in the common_opts section of trove/common/cfg.py Correct, they are still there, see https://github.com/openstack/trove/blob/master/trove/common/cfg.py#L177-L182 . This this options from DEFAULT section should be dropped of, or at least marked as DEPRECATED. This seems like an oversight - or is there something I'm missing? You're not missing anything, you are right. I'd suggest to file a bug report and fix given issue. Best regards, Denis Makogon Cheers Mark ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [neutron] Creating database model and agent
Hello, some days ago I was asking you about creating extension and service plugin for Neutron. Now, I am trying to find how to create database model for this plugin and agent :) Could you check if I am understanding this issues properly? The database model for new plugin should be created in neutron/db directory. The model classes should inherit: 1. neutron.db.model_base.BASEV2, which is related to NeutronBaseV2 class 2. if model should contain id or relation to tenant, it should inherit also HasTenant and HasId from module neutron.db.models_v2 3. All other fields should be defined according to sqlalchemy orm. I have also question - how Neutron knows (or sqlalchemy) which models/tables should be created in database? At this moment I cannot find any code, which initializes the database. The only thing which I found is declarative.declarative_base in db.model_base And one question about creating new agents - is it just thread/process, which is managed by Neutron? I was analysing lbaas code and it is just python script in /usr/bin/, which executes class. Do I have to create anything additional like with database or service plugin to create new agent? Or scripts like in LBAAS will be enough + init script? I also found great diagram, which describes in a nut shell how Neutron service plugins are organised internal: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/Architecture Maybe it would be good idea to put diagram like this to official dev wiki? Of corse after some modifications. Now wiki points to the SecurityGroups code, which is not very helpful for beginners like me :) regards! Maciej ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] [swift] Improving ceilometer.objectstore.swift_middleware
I would like to follow this discussion so I picked up points. - There are two way to collect info from swift, one is pollster and the other is notification. And we discussed about how to solve the performance degradation of swift_middleware here. pollster: - storage.objects - storage.objects.size - storage.objects.containers - storage.containers.objects - storage.containers.objects.size notification: - storage.objects.incoming.bytes - storage.objects.outgoing.bytes - storage.api.request - storage.objects.imcoming.bytes, storage.objects.outgoing.bytes and storage.api.request are handled with swift_middleware because ceilometer need to have the info with per-user and per-tenant basis. - swift has statsd but there is no per-user and per-tenant related info because to realize this swift has to have keystone-isms into core swift code. - improves swift_middleware with stopping the 1:1 mapping b/w API calls and notifications - swift may consume 10s of thousands of event per second and this case is fairly unique so far. I would like to think this performance problem with the following point of view. - need to handle 10s of thousands of event per second - possibility to lost events (i.e. swift proxy goes down when events queued in a swift process) With the notification style there are restriction for above points. Therefore I change the style to get storage.objects.imcoming.bytes, storage.objects.outgoing.bytes and storage.api.request from notification to pollster. Here I met a problem that pointed out by Mr. Merritt, swift has dependency with keystone. But I prefer to solve this problem rather than a problem for notification style. What do you think? My rough idea to solve the dependency problem is - enable statsd (or similar function) in swift - put a middleware in swift proxy - this middleware does not have any communication with ceilometer but put a mark to followed middleware or swift proxy - store metrics with a tenant and a user by statsd if there is the mark store metrics by statsd if there is no mark - Ceilometer (central agent) call APIs to get the metrics Is there any way to solve the dependency problem? Best Regards, Hisashi Osanai ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] plan for moving to using oslo.db
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 13/05/14 17:55, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 5/13/2014 7:35 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Roman Podoliaka rpodoly...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi all, Yes, once the oslo.db initial release is cut, we expect the migration from using of its oslo-incubator version to a library one to be as simple as following the steps you've mentioned. Though, we still need to finish the setup of oslo.db repo (AFAIK, this is currently blocked by the fact we don't run gate tests for oslo.db patches. Doug, Victor, please correct me, if I'm wrong). Yes, we need to work out the best way to test pre-releases of the libraries with apps before we have anything depending on those libraries so we can avoid breaking anything in a way that is hard to find or fix. We have a summit session scheduled for Thursday morning [1]. Doug 1 - http://junodesignsummit.sched.org/event/4f92763857fbe0686fe0436fecae8fbc Thanks, Roman On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: Just wanted to get some thoughts down while they are in my head this morning. Oslo DB is now a library [1]. I'm trying to figure out what the steps are to getting Nova to using that so we can rip out the sync'ed common db code. 1. Looks like it's not in global-requirements yet [2], so that's probably a first step. 2. We'll want to cut a sqlalchemy-migrate release once this patch is merged [3]. This moves a decent chunk of unique constraint patch code out of oslo and into sqlalchemy-migrate where it belongs so we can run unit tests with sqlite to drop unique constraints. 3. Rip this [4] out of oslo.db once migrate is updated and released. 4. Replace nova.openstack.common.db with oslo.db. 5. ??? 6. Profit! Did I miss anything? [1] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.db/ [2] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/requirements/tree/global-requirements.txt [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/87773/ [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/31016/ -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev Just an update on progress, step 2 is complete, the review for step 3 is here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/92393/ Any updates? I'm interested in making nova using oslo.db, this is needed for ongoing effort to make openstack services mysql-connector aware [we have some code for this in oslo.db but nit in oslo-incubator]. Cheers, /Ihar -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJT24EPAAoJEC5aWaUY1u57LGcIANJAGPVk61sIyY77Me1Xn3Sx Z/lx6C4/zdXi6PmBUgVMzdnh/r7cjw0Twe7B1D495qDD0rA/OwrP229WaM4wHBnz bqtih+Bl9rwP6Dij57O6D9cHmcW1gmAxEiqX6iva9RomIWMyB8cAJoEsnD95Dw+q 3PIeZyikDy42p1BTnVlXRLNJhC9RaZyw8wVQ9aUVe6ydYkerbGBALQTOTirlUa8y cq1k3GrKczB53zFpZT1i07wIP4cl9J0xXWcQTjH5cA4Sw/5kxGplT18DHX2/rrs9 YGSYIlpu1UDKyofVB69DMu6/Ryov3bBEf91NGZ3wJwqkdNu7f9qzFOM4mrT7Qq8= =LYQX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Trove] V1 Client improvements
Hello, Stackers. I’d like to raise the question related to list of API calls that were implemented at Trove site but not used as part of V1 Client. Ignored V1 Client APIs: https://github.com/openstack/python-troveclient/blob/master/troveclient/v1/client.py#L72-L79 The problem is that described list of API endpoints are available for at Trove, and can’t be used as part of V1 client (see link above). Given API endpoints can be used only as part of compat client. So, as i can see, we have options: - Clean-up V1 client - remove ignored API, develop plans for V2 - Make ignored API available through V1 client (will take certain efforts to add CLI representation of this calls, same for Trove site - will need to add integration tests to verify that given endpoints are accessible via V1 client) Thoughts? Best regards, Denis Makogon ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [sahara] team meeting minutes July 31
Thanks everyone who have joined Sahara meeting. Here are the logs from the meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/sahara/2014/sahara.2014-07-31-17.59.html http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/sahara/2014/sahara.2014-07-31-17.59.log.html -- Sincerely yours, Sergey Lukjanov Sahara Technical Lead (OpenStack Data Processing) Principal Software Engineer Mirantis Inc. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Compute agent local VM inspector - potential enhancement
On 8/1/2014 4:37 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: Heat cfntools is based on SSH, so I assume it requires TCP/IP connectivity between VM and the central agent(or collector). But in the cloud, some networks are isolated from infrastructure layer network, because of security reasons. Some of our customers even explicitly require such security protection. Does it mean those isolated VMs cannot be monitored by this proposed-VM-agent? Yes, that sounds plausible to me. My understanding is that this VM agent for ceilometer would need connectivity to nova API as well as to the AMQP broker. IMHO the infrastructure requirements from a network topology POV will differ from provider to provider and based on customer reqs / env. Cheers, Eoghan I really wish we can figur out how it could work for all VMs but with no security issues. I'm not familiar with heat-cfntools, so, correct me if I am wrong :) Best regards! Kurt -邮件原件- 发件人: Eoghan Glynn [mailto:egl...@redhat.com] 发送时间: 2014年8月1日 14:46 收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 主题: Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Compute agent local VM inspector - potential enhancement Disclaimer: I'm not fully vested on ceilometer internals, so bear with me. For consumers wanting to leverage ceilometer as a telemetry service atop non-OpenStack Clouds or infrastructure they don't own, some edge cases crop up. Most notably the consumer may not have access to the hypervisor host and therefore cannot leverage the ceilometer compute agent on a per host basis. Yes, currently such access to the hypervisor host is required, least in the case of the libvirt-based inspector. In such scenarios it's my understanding the main option is to employ the central agent to poll measurements from the monitored resources (VMs, etc.). Well, the ceilometer central agent is not generally concerned with with polling related *directly* to VMs - rather it handles acquiring data from RESTful API (glance, neutron etc.) that are not otherwise available in the form of notifications, and also from host-level interfaces such as SNMP. Thanks for additional clarity. Perhaps this proposed local VM agent fills additional use cases whereupon ceilometer is being used without openstack proper (e.g. not a full set of openstack complaint services like neutron, glance, etc.). However this approach requires Cloud APIs (or other mechanisms) which allow the polling impl to obtain the desired measurements (VM memory, CPU, net stats, etc.) and moreover the polling approach has it's own set of pros / cons from a arch / topology perspective. Indeed. The other potential option is to setup the ceilometer compute agent within the VM and have each VM publish measurements to the collector -- a local VM agent / inspector if you will. With respect to this local VM agent approach: (a) I haven't seen this documented to date; is there any desire / reqs to support this topology? (b) If yes to #a, I whipped up a crude PoC here: http://tinyurl.com/pqjgotv Are folks willing to consider a BP for this approach? So in a sense this is similar to the Heat cfn-push-stats utility[1] and seems to suffer from the same fundamental problem, i.e. the need for injection of credentials (user/passwds, keys, whatever) into the VM in order to allow the metric datapoints be pushed up to the infrastructure layer (e.g. onto the AMQP bus, or to a REST API endpoint). How would you propose to solve that credentialing issue? My initial approximation would be to target use cases where end users do not have direct guest access or have limited guest access such that their UID / GID cannot access the conf file. For example instances which only provide app access provisioned using heat SoftwareDeployments (http://tinyurl.com/qxmh2of) or trove database instances. In general I don't see this approach from a security POV much different than whats done with the trove guest agent (http://tinyurl.com/ohvtmtz). Longer term perhaps credentials could be mitigated using Barbican as suggested here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1158328 Cheers, Eoghan [1] https://github.com/openstack/heat-cfntools/blob/master/bin/cfn-push-stats ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][infra] Adding support for AMQP 1.0 Messaging to Oslo.Messaging and infra/config
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:04:41 -0700, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 7/30/2014 11:59 AM, Ken Giusti wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:25:46 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 08:54:01AM -0400, Ken Giusti wrote: Greetings, snip At this point, there are no integration tests that exercise the driver. However, the new unit tests include a test 'broker', which allow the unit tests to fully exercise the new driver, right down to the network. That's a bonus of AMQP 1.0 - it can support peer-2-peer messaging. So its the new unit tests that have the 'hard' requirement of the proton libraries.And mocking-out the proton libraries really doesn't allow us to do any meaningful tests of the driver. snip If your unit tests are dependent on a specific dependent library aren't they no longer unit tests but integration tests anyway? Good point - yes, they are certainly more than just unit tests. I'd consider them more functional tests than integration tests, tho: they only test from the new driver API down to the wire (and back up again via the fake loopback broker). For integration testing, I'd want to put a real broker in there, and run real subprojects over oslo.messaging using the new driver (neutron, etc). I'd really like to avoid the classic unit test approach of mocking out the underlying messaging client api if possible. Even though that would avoid the dependency, I think it could result in the same issues we've had with the existing impl_qpid tests passing in mock, but failing when run against qpidd. Just wondering, not trying to put up road-blocks because I'd like to see how this code performs but haven't had time yet to play with it. np, a good question, thanks! When you do get a chance to kick the tires, feel free to ping me with any questions/issues you have. Thanks! -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][infra] Adding support for AMQP 1.0 Messaging to Oslo.Messaging and infra/config
It seems like this is precisely what the functional test setup was designed to handle. Is there a reason you don't want to run them as functional tests instead of unit tests? As functional tests, nobody would need new prereqs just to make it through unit tests and anyone that wants to do the full tests can install them and run 'tox functional'. This is how neutron is starting to test the behavior of OVS and it seems to work well. On Aug 1, 2014 6:01 AM, Ken Giusti kgiu...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:04:41 -0700, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 7/30/2014 11:59 AM, Ken Giusti wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:25:46 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 08:54:01AM -0400, Ken Giusti wrote: Greetings, snip At this point, there are no integration tests that exercise the driver. However, the new unit tests include a test 'broker', which allow the unit tests to fully exercise the new driver, right down to the network. That's a bonus of AMQP 1.0 - it can support peer-2-peer messaging. So its the new unit tests that have the 'hard' requirement of the proton libraries.And mocking-out the proton libraries really doesn't allow us to do any meaningful tests of the driver. snip If your unit tests are dependent on a specific dependent library aren't they no longer unit tests but integration tests anyway? Good point - yes, they are certainly more than just unit tests. I'd consider them more functional tests than integration tests, tho: they only test from the new driver API down to the wire (and back up again via the fake loopback broker). For integration testing, I'd want to put a real broker in there, and run real subprojects over oslo.messaging using the new driver (neutron, etc). I'd really like to avoid the classic unit test approach of mocking out the underlying messaging client api if possible. Even though that would avoid the dependency, I think it could result in the same issues we've had with the existing impl_qpid tests passing in mock, but failing when run against qpidd. Just wondering, not trying to put up road-blocks because I'd like to see how this code performs but haven't had time yet to play with it. np, a good question, thanks! When you do get a chance to kick the tires, feel free to ping me with any questions/issues you have. Thanks! -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][infra] Adding support for AMQP 1.0 Messaging to Oslo.Messaging and infra/config
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 22:14:51 +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2014-07-30 14:59:09 -0400 (-0400), Ken Giusti wrote: Thanks Daniel. It was my understanding - which may be wrong - that having devstack install the 'out of band' packages would only help in the case of the devstack-based integration tests, not in the case of CI running the unit tests. Is that indeed the case? [...] I'm open to any thoughts on how best to solve this, thanks. Since they're in EPEL and we run Python 2.6 unit tests today on CentOS 6 servers, if the proton libraries install successfully there perhaps we could opportunistically exercise it only under Python 2.6 for now? Not ideal, but it does get it enforced upstream with minimal fuss. I'd really rather not start accumulating arbitrary PPA sources on our job workers... I know we've done it for a handful of multi-project efforts where we needed select backports from non-LTS releases, but we've so far limited that to only PPAs maintained by the same package teams as the mainline distro packages themselves. Yeah, it's becoming pretty clear that adding this PPA to infra is not The Right Thing To Do. How does this sound as an alternative: 1) _for_ _now_, make the dependent unit tests optional for oslo.messaging. Specifically, by default tox will not run them, but I'll add a new testenv that adds a requirement for the dependent packages and runs all the unit tests (default tests + new amqp1.0 tests). Eg, do 'tox -e amqp1' to pull in the python packages that require the libraries, and run all unit tests. This allows those developers that have installed the proton libraries to run the tests, and avoid making life hard for those devs who don't have the libraries installed. 2) Propose a new optional configuration flag in devstack that enables the AMQP 1.0 messaging protocol (default off). Something like $RPC_MESSAGING_PROTOCOL == AMQP1. When this is set in the devstack config, rpc_backend will install the AMQP 1.0 libraries, adding the Qpid PPA in the case of ubuntu for now. 3) Create a non-voting oslo.messaging gate test [0] that merely runs the 'tox -e amqp1' tests. Of course, additional integration tests are a Good Thing, but at the very least we should start with this. This would give us a heads up should new patches break the amqp 1.0 driver. This test could eventually become gating once the driver matures and the packages find their way into all the proper repos. 4) Profit (couldn't resist :) Opinions? [0] I honestly have no idea how to do this, or if it's even feasible btw - I've never written a gating test before. I'd appreciate any pointers to get me started, thanks! Longer term, I'd suggest getting it sponsored into Debian unstable/testing ASAP, interesting the Ubuntu OpenStack team in importing it into the development tree for the next Ubuntu release, and then incorporating it into the Trusty Ubuntu Cloud Archive. We're not using UCA yet, but on Trusty we probably should consider adding it sooner rather than later since when we tried to tack on the Precise UCA in the last couple cycles we had too many headaches from trying to jump ahead substantially on fundamental bits like libvirt. Breaking sooner and more often means those incremental issues are easier to identify and address, usually. Ah - I didn't know that, thanks! I know one of the Qpid devs is currently engaged in getting these packages into Debian. I'll reach out to him and see if he can work on getting it into UCA next. Thanks again - very valuable info! -- Jeremy Stanley -- Ken Giusti (kgiu...@gmail.com) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][infra] Adding support for AMQP 1.0 Messaging to Oslo.Messaging and infra/config
On 08/01/2014 03:29 PM, Ken Giusti wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 22:14:51 +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2014-07-30 14:59:09 -0400 (-0400), Ken Giusti wrote: Thanks Daniel. It was my understanding - which may be wrong - that having devstack install the 'out of band' packages would only help in the case of the devstack-based integration tests, not in the case of CI running the unit tests. Is that indeed the case? [...] I'm open to any thoughts on how best to solve this, thanks. Since they're in EPEL and we run Python 2.6 unit tests today on CentOS 6 servers, if the proton libraries install successfully there perhaps we could opportunistically exercise it only under Python 2.6 for now? Not ideal, but it does get it enforced upstream with minimal fuss. I'd really rather not start accumulating arbitrary PPA sources on our job workers... I know we've done it for a handful of multi-project efforts where we needed select backports from non-LTS releases, but we've so far limited that to only PPAs maintained by the same package teams as the mainline distro packages themselves. Yeah, it's becoming pretty clear that adding this PPA to infra is not The Right Thing To Do. How does this sound as an alternative: 1) _for_ _now_, make the dependent unit tests optional for oslo.messaging. Specifically, by default tox will not run them, but I'll add a new testenv that adds a requirement for the dependent packages and runs all the unit tests (default tests + new amqp1.0 tests). Eg, do 'tox -e amqp1' to pull in the python packages that require the libraries, and run all unit tests. This allows those developers that have installed the proton libraries to run the tests, and avoid making life hard for those devs who don't have the libraries installed. 2) Propose a new optional configuration flag in devstack that enables the AMQP 1.0 messaging protocol (default off). Something like $RPC_MESSAGING_PROTOCOL == AMQP1. When this is set in the devstack config, rpc_backend will install the AMQP 1.0 libraries, adding the Qpid PPA in the case of ubuntu for now. 3) Create a non-voting oslo.messaging gate test [0] that merely runs the 'tox -e amqp1' tests. Of course, additional integration tests are a Good Thing, but at the very least we should start with this. This would give us a heads up should new patches break the amqp 1.0 driver. This test could eventually become gating once the driver matures and the packages find their way into all the proper repos. 4) Profit (couldn't resist :) +1 As long as we get the tests running, I'm happy. This sounds like something more acceptable for the infrastructure - at least based on the discussions on this thread. The plan sounds good to me. I think it's also possible to run amqp10 gate *just* for the changes happening in the *amqp* package but it's probably worth it to just make it non-voting and run it for every patch, as you mentioned. Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Marconi][Zaqar] Adding Victoria Martínez de la Cruz (vkmc) to Zaqar's core team
Greetings, I'd like to propose adding Victoria Martínez de la Cruz (vkmc) to zaqar's core team. Victoria has been part of the community for several months now. During this time, she's been contributing to many different areas: - Docs - Code - Community Support - Research (amazing work on the amqp side) She's a great asset of Zaqar's community. If no one objects, I'll proceed and add her in a week from now. Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Marconi][Zaqar] Adding Victoria Martínez de la Cruz (vkmc) to Zaqar's core team
A HUGE +1 ! On 8/1/14 10:11 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote: Greetings, I'd like to propose adding Victoria Martínez de la Cruz (vkmc) to zaqar's core team. Victoria has been part of the community for several months now. During this time, she's been contributing to many different areas: - Docs - Code - Community Support - Research (amazing work on the amqp side) She's a great asset of Zaqar's community. If no one objects, I'll proceed and add her in a week from now. Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] plan for moving to using oslo.db
Any updates? Eugeniya Kudryashova is working hard on using oslo.db in nova. Please, look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/101901/ On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 13/05/14 17:55, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 5/13/2014 7:35 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Roman Podoliaka rpodoly...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi all, Yes, once the oslo.db initial release is cut, we expect the migration from using of its oslo-incubator version to a library one to be as simple as following the steps you've mentioned. Though, we still need to finish the setup of oslo.db repo (AFAIK, this is currently blocked by the fact we don't run gate tests for oslo.db patches. Doug, Victor, please correct me, if I'm wrong). Yes, we need to work out the best way to test pre-releases of the libraries with apps before we have anything depending on those libraries so we can avoid breaking anything in a way that is hard to find or fix. We have a summit session scheduled for Thursday morning [1]. Doug 1 - http://junodesignsummit.sched.org/event/4f92763857fbe0686fe0436fecae8fbc Thanks, Roman On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: Just wanted to get some thoughts down while they are in my head this morning. Oslo DB is now a library [1]. I'm trying to figure out what the steps are to getting Nova to using that so we can rip out the sync'ed common db code. 1. Looks like it's not in global-requirements yet [2], so that's probably a first step. 2. We'll want to cut a sqlalchemy-migrate release once this patch is merged [3]. This moves a decent chunk of unique constraint patch code out of oslo and into sqlalchemy-migrate where it belongs so we can run unit tests with sqlite to drop unique constraints. 3. Rip this [4] out of oslo.db once migrate is updated and released. 4. Replace nova.openstack.common.db with oslo.db. 5. ??? 6. Profit! Did I miss anything? [1] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.db/ [2] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/requirements/tree/global-requirements.txt [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/87773/ [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/31016/ -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev Just an update on progress, step 2 is complete, the review for step 3 is here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/92393/ Any updates? I'm interested in making nova using oslo.db, this is needed for ongoing effort to make openstack services mysql-connector aware [we have some code for this in oslo.db but nit in oslo-incubator]. Cheers, /Ihar -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJT24EPAAoJEC5aWaUY1u57LGcIANJAGPVk61sIyY77Me1Xn3Sx Z/lx6C4/zdXi6PmBUgVMzdnh/r7cjw0Twe7B1D495qDD0rA/OwrP229WaM4wHBnz bqtih+Bl9rwP6Dij57O6D9cHmcW1gmAxEiqX6iva9RomIWMyB8cAJoEsnD95Dw+q 3PIeZyikDy42p1BTnVlXRLNJhC9RaZyw8wVQ9aUVe6ydYkerbGBALQTOTirlUa8y cq1k3GrKczB53zFpZT1i07wIP4cl9J0xXWcQTjH5cA4Sw/5kxGplT18DHX2/rrs9 YGSYIlpu1UDKyofVB69DMu6/Ryov3bBEf91NGZ3wJwqkdNu7f9qzFOM4mrT7Qq8= =LYQX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Best regards, Andrey Kurilin. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Status of A/A HA for neutron-metadata-agent?
Hi all, I have been asked by a colleague about the status of A/A HA for neutron-* processes. From the 'HA guide' [1], l3-agent and metadata-agent are the only neutron components that can't be deployed in A/A HA (corosync/pacemaker for a/p is documented as available 'out of the box' for both). The l3-agent work is approved for J3 [4] but I am unaware of any work on the metadata-agent and can't see any mention in [2][3]. Is this someone has looked at, or is planning to (though ultimately K would be the earliest right?)? thanks! marios [1] http://docs.openstack.org/high-availability-guide/content/index.html [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronJunoProjectPlan [3] https://launchpad.net/neutron/+milestone/juno-3 [4] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/neutron-specs/tree/specs/juno/l3-high-availability.rst ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] Networks Generating In Fuel
Hi! Request to assign vips is here: https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/orchestrator/deployment_serializers.py#L376 Most requests to assign other ips are here: https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/node.py#L679-684 You can track assign_ips() and assign_vip() usage to see all calls to them. Aleksey Kasatkin -- Forwarded message -- From: zh...@certusnet.com.cn zh...@certusnet.com.cn Date: Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 10:36 AM Subject: [openstack-dev] Networks Generating In Fuel To: openstack-dev openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Hi! I'm now developing in Fuel and I want to add a virtual ip address to the NIC of br-ex with the same ip range of public address. So I want to know where IPs of node's such as br-ex, br-storage are generated. Can you tell me ? ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Marconi][Zaqar] Adding Victoria Martínez de la Cruz (vkmc) to Zaqar's core team
+1 for sure! :D Sriram Madapusi Vasudevan On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:21 AM, Malini Kamalambal malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com wrote: A HUGE +1 ! On 8/1/14 10:11 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote: Greetings, I'd like to propose adding Victoria Martínez de la Cruz (vkmc) to zaqar's core team. Victoria has been part of the community for several months now. During this time, she's been contributing to many different areas: - Docs - Code - Community Support - Research (amazing work on the amqp side) She's a great asset of Zaqar's community. If no one objects, I'll proceed and add her in a week from now. Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Nominating Jay Pipes for nova-core
+1 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] DevStack program change
I propose we de-program DevStack and consolidate it into the QA program. Some of my concerns about doing this in the beginning have proven to be a non-issue in practice. Also, I believe a program's focus can and should be wider than we have implemented up to now and this a step toward consolidating narrowly defined programs. I read the QA mission statement to already include DevStack's purpose so no change should be required there. I'll propose the governance changes following a few days of discussion. This is purely a program-level change, I do not anticipate changes to the DevStack project itself. dt (soon-to-be-former?) DevStack PTL -- Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack] Cinder tempest api volume tests failed
On 8/1/2014 4:16 AM, Nikesh Kumar Mahalka wrote: Hi Mike,test which is failed for me is: *tempest.api.volume.admin.test_volume_types.VolumeTypesTest* I am getting error in below function call in above test *self.volumes_client.wait_for_volume_status**(volume['id'],** 'available')**.* This function call is in below function: *@test.attr(type='smoke') * *def test_create_get_delete_volume_with_volume_type_and_extra_specs(self)* I saw in c-sch log and i found this major issue: *2014-08-01 14:08:05.773 11853 ERROR cinder.scheduler.flows.create_volume [req-ceafd00c-30b1-4846-a555-6116556efb3b 43af88811b2243238d3d9fc732731565 a39922e8e5284729b07fcd045cfd5a88 - - -] Failed to run task cinder.scheduler.flows.create_volume.ScheduleCreateVolumeTask;volume:create: No valid host was found. No weighed hosts available* Actually by analyzing the test i found: 1)it is creating a volume-type with extra_specs 2)it is creating a volume with volume type and here it is failing. *Below is my new local.conf file. * *Am i missing anything in this?* [[local|localrc]] ADMIN_PASSWORD=some_password DATABASE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD RABBIT_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_TOKEN=ADMIN FLAT_INTERFACE=eth0 FIXED_RANGE=192.168.2.80/29 http://192.168.2.80/29 HOST_IP=192.168.2.64 LOGFILE=$DEST/logs/stack.sh.log SCREEN_LOGDIR=$DEST/logs/screen SYSLOG=True SYSLOG_HOST=$HOST_IP SYSLOG_PORT=516 RECLONE=yes CINDER_ENABLED_BACKENDS=client:client_driver TEMPEST_VOLUME_DRIVER=client_iscsi TEMPEST_VOLUME_VENDOR=CLIENT TEMPEST_STORAGE_PROTOCOL=iSCSI VOLUME_BACKING_FILE_SIZE=20G [[post-config|$CINDER_CONF]] [client_driver] volume_driver=cinder.volume.drivers.san.client.iscsi.client_iscsi.ClientISCSIDriver san_ip=192.168.2.192 san_login=some_name san_password=some_password client_iscsi_ips = 192.168.2.193 *Below is my cinder.conf:* [keystone_authtoken] auth_uri = http://192.168.2.64:5000/v2.0 signing_dir = /var/cache/cinder admin_password = some_password admin_user = cinder admin_tenant_name = service cafile = identity_uri = http://192.168.2.64:35357 [DEFAULT] rabbit_password = some_password rabbit_hosts = 192.168.2.64 rpc_backend = cinder.openstack.common.rpc.impl_kombu use_syslog = True default_volume_type = client_driver enabled_backends = client_driver enable_v1_api = true periodic_interval = 60 lock_path = /opt/stack/data/cinder state_path = /opt/stack/data/cinder osapi_volume_extension = cinder.api.contrib.standard_extensions rootwrap_config = /etc/cinder/rootwrap.conf api_paste_config = /etc/cinder/api-paste.ini sql_connection = mysql://root:some_password@127.0.0.1/cinder?charset=utf8 http://127.0.0.1/cinder?charset=utf8 iscsi_helper = tgtadm my_ip = 192.168.2.64 verbose = True debug = True auth_strategy = keystone [client_driver] client_iscsi_ips = 192.168.2.193 san_password = !manage san_login = manage san_ip = 192.168.2.192 volume_driver = cinder.volume.drivers.san.client.iscsi.client_iscsi.ClientISCSIDriver Regards Nikesh On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 1:56 AM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com mailto:thin...@gmail.com wrote: On 11:30 Thu 31 Jul , Nikesh Kumar Mahalka wrote: I deployed a single node devstack on Ubuntu 14.04. This devstack belongs to Juno. When i am running tempest api volume test, i am getting some tests failed. Hi Nikesh, To further figure out what's wrong, take a look at the c-vol, c-api and c-sch tabs in the stack screen session. If you're unsure where to go from there after looking at the output, set the `SCREEN_LOGDIR` setting in your local.conf [1] and copy the logs from those tabs to paste.openstack.org http://paste.openstack.org for us to see. [1] - http://devstack.org/configuration.html -- Mike Perez ___ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openst...@lists.openstack.org mailto:openst...@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev Can you please start tagging your threads on an out-of-tree cinder driver with [cinder] in the subject line so this gets filtered into the cinder channel at least. Generally when people come to the openstack-dev list asking for help with a deployment they get sent to ask.openstack.org or the general openstack mailing list. This sort of falls in between since it sounds like you're doing development on a new driver and trying to get tempest working, but if this is going to be an openstack-dev list discussion, please isolate it to [cinder], or go to the #openstack-cinder channel in IRC. -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann ___ OpenStack-dev mailing
Re: [openstack-dev] how and which tempest tests to run
On 8/1/2014 3:32 AM, Nikesh Kumar Mahalka wrote: I deployed a single node devstack on Ubuntu 14.04. This devstack belongs to Juno. I have written a cinder-volume driver for my client backend. I want to contribute this driver in Juno release. As i analyzed the contribution process,it is telling to run tempest tests for Continuous Integration. Could any one tell me how and which tempest tests to run on this devstack deployment for cinder volume driver? Also tempest has many test cases.Do i have to pass all tests for contribution of my driver? Also am i missing any thing thing in below local.conf? *_Below are steps for my devstack deployment:_* 1) git clone https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack.git 2)cd devstack 3)vi local.conf [[local|localrc]] ADMIN_PASSWORD=some_password DATABASE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD RABBIT_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_PASSWORD=$ADMIN_PASSWORD SERVICE_TOKEN=ADMIN FLAT_INTERFACE=eth0 FIXED_RANGE=192.168.2.80/29 http://192.168.2.80/29 #FLOATING_RANGE=192.168.20.0/25 http://192.168.20.0/25 HOST_IP=192.168.2.64 LOGFILE=$DEST/logs/stack.sh.log SCREEN_LOGDIR=$DEST/logs/screen SYSLOG=True SYSLOG_HOST=$HOST_IP SYSLOG_PORT=516 RECLONE=yes CINDER_ENABLED_BACKENDS=client:client_driver TEMPEST_VOLUME_DRIVER=client_iscsi TEMPEST_VOLUME_VENDOR=CLIENT TEMPEST_STORAGE_PROTOCOL=iSCSI VOLUME_BACKING_FILE_SIZE=20G [[post-config|$CINDER_CONF]] [client_driver] volume_driver=cinder.volume.drivers.san.client.iscsi.client_iscsi.ClientISCSIDriver san_ip = 192.168.2.192 san_login = some_name san_password =some_password client_iscsi_ips = 192.168.2.193 4)./stack.sh ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev Please tag your cinder-specific driver test questions with [cinder] so these threads are filtered appropriately in people's mail clients. -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Nominating Jay Pipes for nova-core
+1 Regards, Mitsuhiro Tanino mitsuhiro.tan...@hds.com HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS c/o Red Hat, 314 Littleton Road, Westford, MA 01886 -Original Message- From: Russell Bryant [mailto:rbry...@redhat.com] Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:58 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Nominating Jay Pipes for nova-core On 07/30/2014 05:10 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 07/30/2014 05:02 PM, Michael Still wrote: Greetings, I would like to nominate Jay Pipes for the nova-core team. Jay has been involved with nova for a long time now. He's previously been a nova core, as well as a glance core (and PTL). He's been around so long that there are probably other types of core status I have missed. Please respond with +1s or any concerns. +1 Further, I'd like to propose that we treat all of existing +1 reviews as +2 (once he's officially added to the team). Does anyone have a problem with doing that? I think some folks would have done that anyway, but I wanted to clarify that it's OK. -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [TripleO] a small experiment with Ansible in TripleO
A few of us have been independently experimenting with Ansible as a backend for TripleO, and have just decided to try experimenting together. I've chatted with Robert, and he says that TripleO was always intended to have pluggable backends (CM layer), and just never had anyone interested in working on them. (I see it now, even in the early docs and talks, I guess I just couldn't see the forest for the trees.) So, the work is in line with the overall goals of the TripleO project. We're starting with a tiny scope, focused only on updating a running TripleO deployment, so our first work is in: - Create an Ansible Dynamic Inventory plugin to extract metadata from Heat - Improve/extend the Ansible nova_compute Cloud Module (or create a new one), for Nova rebuild - Develop a minimal handoff from Heat to Ansible, particularly focused on the interactions between os-collect-config and Ansible We're merging our work in this repo, until we figure out where it should live: https://github.com/allisonrandal/tripleo-ansible We've set ourselves one week as the first sanity-check to see whether this idea is going anywhere, and we may scrap it all at that point. But, it seems best to be totally transparent about the idea from the start, so no-one is surprised later. Cheers, Allison ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Spec exceptions are closed, FPF is August 21
Armando's point #2 is a good one. I see that we should have raised awareness of this more than we did. The bulk of the discussion and the development work moved over to the oslo team and I focused energy on other things. What I didn't realize was that the importance of this work to Neutron did not transfer along with it and that simply delivering the new functionality in oslo by Juno was not sufficient as Neutron would need time to incorporate it. I am at a point now where I have some time to work on this. If reconsideration for Juno is still an option at this time then I think what we need to do is to resolve the concerns that are still outstanding. I'll admit that I really don't understand what the concerns are. I believe that the security concerns have been addressed. If you still have concerns around the design of this feature please bring them up specifically. Thanks, Carl On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Armando M. arma...@gmail.com wrote: It is not my intention debating, pointing fingers and finding culprits, these issues can be addressed in some other context. I am gonna say three things: 1) If a core-reviewer puts a -2, there must be a good reason for it. If other reviewers blindly move on as some people seem to imply here, then those reviewers should probably not review the code at all! My policy is to review all the code I am interested in/I can, regardless of the score. My -1 may be someone's +1 (or vice versa), so 'trusting' someone else's vote is the wrong way to go about this. 2) If we all feel that this feature is important (which I am not sure it was being marked as 'low' in oslo, not sure how it was tracked in Neutron), there is the weekly IRC Neutron meeting to raise awareness, since all cores participate; to the best of my knowledge we never spoke (or barely) of the rootwrap work. 3) If people do want this work in Juno (Carl being one of them), we can figure out how to make one final push, and assess potential regression. We 'rushed' other features late in cycle in the past (like nova/neutron event notifications) and if we keep this disabled by default in Juno, I don't think it's really that risky. I can work with Carl to give the patches some more love. Armando On 31 July 2014 15:40, Rudra Rugge ru...@contrailsystems.com wrote: Hi Kyle, I also agree with Mandeep's suggestion of putting a time frame on the lingering -2 if the addressed concerns have been taken care of. In my experience also a sticky -2 detracts other reviewers from reviewing an updated patch. Either a time-frame or a possible override by PTL (move to -1) would help make progress on the review. Regards, Rudra On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Mandeep Dhami dh...@noironetworks.com wrote: Hi Kyle: As -2 is sticky, and as there exists a possibility that the original core might not get time to get back to re-reviewing his, do you think that there should be clearer guidelines on it's usage (to avoid what you identified as dropping of the balls)? Salvatore had a good guidance in a related thread [0], do you agree with something like that? I try to avoid -2s as much as possible. I put a -2 only when I reckon your patch should never be merged because it'll make the software unstable or tries to solve a problem that does not exist. -2s stick across patches and tend to put off other reviewers. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-July/041339.html Or do you think that 3-5 days after an update that addresses the issues identified in the original -2, we should automatically remove that -2? If this does not happen often, this process does not have to be automated, just an exception that the PTL can exercise to address issues where the original reason for -2 has been addressed and nothing new has been identified? On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Yuriy Taraday yorik@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote: and even less possibly rootwrap [3] if the security implications can be worked out. Can you please provide some input on those security implications that are not worked out yet? I'm really surprised to see such comments in some ML thread not directly related to the BP. Why is my spec blocked? Neither spec [1] nor code (which is available for a really long time now [2] [3]) can get enough reviewers' attention because of those groundless -2's. Should I abandon these change requests and file new ones to get some eyes on my code and proposals? It's just getting ridiculous. Let's take a look at timeline, shall we? I share your concerns here as well, and I'm sorry you've had a bad experience working with the community here. Mar, 25 - first version of the first part of Neutron code is published at [2] Mar, 28 - first reviewers come and it gets -1'd by
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Crash Issue: OVS-Agent status needs to be fully represented/processed
Recently we encountered some ovs-agent crash issues. [1][2][3] *[Root cause]* 1. Currently only a 'restarted' flag is used in rpc_loop() to identify ovs status. * ovs_restarted = self.check_ovs_restart() * *True*: ovs is running, but a restart happened before this loop. rpc_loop() reset bridges and re-process ports. *False*: ovs is running since last loop, rpc_loop() continue to process in a normal way. But if ovs is dead, or is not up yet during a restart, check_ovs_restart() will incorrectly returns True. Then rpc_loop() continues to reset bridges, and apply other ovs operations, till causing exceptions/crash. Related Bug: [1] [2] 2. Also, during agent boot up, ovs status is not checked at all. Agent crashes without no useful log info, when ovs is dead. Related Bug: [3] *[Proposal]* 1. Add const {NORMAL, DEAD, RESTARTED} to represent ovs status. NORMAL - ovs is running since last loop, rpc_loop() continue to process in a normal way. RESTARTED - ovs is running, but a restart happened before this loop. rpc_loop() reset bridges and re-process ports. DEAD - keep agent running, but rpc_loop() doesn't apply ovs operations to prevent unnecessary exceptions/crash. When ovs is up, it enters RESTARTED mode; 2. Check ovs status during agent boot up, if it's DEAD, exit graceful since subsequent operations causes a crash, and write log to remind that ovs_dead causes agent termination. *[Code Review]* https://review.openstack.org/#/c/110538/ Will be appreciated if you could share some thoughts or do a quick code review. Thanks. Best, Robin [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1296202 [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1350179 [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1351135 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [marconi] Proposal to add Victoria Martínez de la Cruz as a core reviewer
Hi crew, I’d like to propose Vicky (vkmc) be added to Marconi’s core reviewer team. She is a regular contributor in terms of both code and reviews, is an insightful and regular participant in team discussions, and leads by example in terms of quality of work, treating others as friends and family, and being honest and constructive in her community participation. Marconi core reviewers, please respond with +1 or -1 per your vote on adding Vicky. -- Kurt G. (kgriffs) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Creating database model and agent
If it helps as a reference, these three reviews by Brandon Logan are adding exactly what you're talking about for the new LBaaS api. Models, migration, extension, plugin, unit tests: * New extension for version 2 of LBaaS API - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105331 * Plugin/DB additions for version 2 of LBaaS API - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105609 * Tests for extension, db and plugin for LBaaS V2 - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105610 And I don't believe there's anything extra in neutron for a new agent, though I'm not 100% certain about that. Thanks, Doug On 8/1/14, 3:14 AM, Maciej Nabożny m...@mnabozny.pl wrote: Hello, some days ago I was asking you about creating extension and service plugin for Neutron. Now, I am trying to find how to create database model for this plugin and agent :) Could you check if I am understanding this issues properly? The database model for new plugin should be created in neutron/db directory. The model classes should inherit: 1. neutron.db.model_base.BASEV2, which is related to NeutronBaseV2 class 2. if model should contain id or relation to tenant, it should inherit also HasTenant and HasId from module neutron.db.models_v2 3. All other fields should be defined according to sqlalchemy orm. I have also question - how Neutron knows (or sqlalchemy) which models/tables should be created in database? At this moment I cannot find any code, which initializes the database. The only thing which I found is declarative.declarative_base in db.model_base And one question about creating new agents - is it just thread/process, which is managed by Neutron? I was analysing lbaas code and it is just python script in /usr/bin/, which executes class. Do I have to create anything additional like with database or service plugin to create new agent? Or scripts like in LBAAS will be enough + init script? I also found great diagram, which describes in a nut shell how Neutron service plugins are organised internal: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/Architecture Maybe it would be good idea to put diagram like this to official dev wiki? Of corse after some modifications. Now wiki points to the SecurityGroups code, which is not very helpful for beginners like me :) regards! Maciej ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [neutron] API confusion
http://developer.openstack.org/api-ref-networking-v2.html and http://docs.openstack.org/api/openstack-network/2.0/content/GET_listMembers__v2.0_pools__pool_id__members_lbaas_ext_ops_member.html say that to list LB pool members, the URL to GET is /v2.0/pools/{pool_id}/members When I use the CLI (`neutron -v lb-member-list`) I see a GET on /v2.0/lb/members.json What's going on here? Thanks, Mike___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Proposal to add Victoria Martínez de la Cruz as a core reviewer
There is another thread going on for the same http://www.mail-archive.com/openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org/msg30897.html We sure need vkmc in the core :) From: Kurt Griffiths kurt.griffi...@rackspace.commailto:kurt.griffi...@rackspace.com Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Friday, August 1, 2014 1:17 PM To: OpenStack Dev openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Proposal to add Victoria Martínez de la Cruz as a core reviewer Hi crew, I’d like to propose Vicky (vkmc) be added to Marconi’s core reviewer team. She is a regular contributor in terms of both code and reviews, is an insightful and regular participant in team discussions, and leads by example in terms of quality of work, treating others as friends and family, and being honest and constructive in her community participation. Marconi core reviewers, please respond with +1 or -1 per your vote on adding Vicky. -- Kurt G. (kgriffs) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Nominating Jay Pipes for nova-core
On 07/31/2014 10:49 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/31/2014 06:26 PM, Michael Still wrote: On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: Further, I'd like to propose that we treat all of existing +1 reviews as +2 (once he's officially added to the team). Does anyone have a problem with doing that? I think some folks would have done that anyway, but I wanted to clarify that it's OK. As a core I sometimes +1 something to indicate a weak acceptance of the code instead of a strong acceptance (perhaps its not my area of expertise). Do we think it would be better to ask Jay to scan through his recent +1s and promote those he is comfortable with to +2s? I don't think that would take very long, and would keep the intent of the reviews clear. Agreed. That's more typical and means that you don't need to parse intent on +1s. Let jay upgrade the votes he feels comfortable with holding a full +2 on. Of course. I have no problem doing that. Frankly, I kind of revisit reviews often just in the course of my review work each day, so it's not a big deal at all. Oh, and thanks very much for the nomination. Best, -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Marconi] All-hands documentation day
I’m game for thursday. Love to help out. On 8/1/14, 2:26 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/31/2014 09:57 PM, Victoria Martínez de la Cruz wrote: Hi everyone, Earlier today I went through the documentation requirements for graduation [0] and it looks like there is some work do to. The structure we should follow is detailed in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/marconi-graduation. It would be nice to do an all-hands documentation day next week to make this happen. Can you join us? When is it better for you? Hey Vicky, Awesome work, thanks for putting this together. I'd propose doing it on Thursday since, hopefully, some other patches will land during that week that will require documentation too. Flavio, My best, Victoria [0] https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/incubation- integration-requirements.rst#documentation--user-support-1 -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] a small experiment with Ansible in TripleO
Hi all, I have been working on Ansible nova_compute, a new “nova_facts” module as well as the nova dynamic inventory plugin, so please do feel free to collaborate with me on this. Regards, Patrick On Aug 1, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Allison Randal alli...@lohutok.net wrote: A few of us have been independently experimenting with Ansible as a backend for TripleO, and have just decided to try experimenting together. I've chatted with Robert, and he says that TripleO was always intended to have pluggable backends (CM layer), and just never had anyone interested in working on them. (I see it now, even in the early docs and talks, I guess I just couldn't see the forest for the trees.) So, the work is in line with the overall goals of the TripleO project. We're starting with a tiny scope, focused only on updating a running TripleO deployment, so our first work is in: - Create an Ansible Dynamic Inventory plugin to extract metadata from Heat - Improve/extend the Ansible nova_compute Cloud Module (or create a new one), for Nova rebuild - Develop a minimal handoff from Heat to Ansible, particularly focused on the interactions between os-collect-config and Ansible We're merging our work in this repo, until we figure out where it should live: https://github.com/allisonrandal/tripleo-ansible We've set ourselves one week as the first sanity-check to see whether this idea is going anywhere, and we may scrap it all at that point. But, it seems best to be totally transparent about the idea from the start, so no-one is surprised later. Cheers, Allison ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] a small experiment with Ansible in TripleO
On 08/01/2014 12:06 PM, Galbraith, Patrick wrote: I have been working on Ansible nova_compute, a new “nova_facts” module as well as the nova dynamic inventory plugin, so please do feel free to collaborate with me on this. Great, are you on #tripleo? I'm 'wendar', and I'm working on this bit. Allison ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev] [Cinder] running tempest tests against your custom backend
Seems there's a number of new folks trying to run devstack/tempest tests against third party backends. Please note the Cinder Wiki page [1] includes documentation to help you get this working and point out what needs modified in the Tempest settings. Thanks, John [1]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder (See the section: Configuring devstack to use your driver and backend ) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack] Cinder tempest api volume tests failed
On 14:46 Fri 01 Aug , Nikesh Kumar Mahalka wrote: Hi Mike,test which is failed for me is: *tempest.api.volume.admin.test_volume_types.VolumeTypesTest* I am getting error in below function call in above test *self.volumes_client.wait_for_volume_status**(volume['id'],* * 'available')**.* This function call is in below function: *@test.attr(type='smoke')* *def test_create_get_delete_volume_with_volume_type_and_extra_specs(self)* This is due to the extra spec test by default setting the vendor name capability to 'Open Source'. Since your driver probably has a different vendor name, the scheduler is not able to find a suitable host to fulfill the volume create request with that volume type. There is a wiki page [1] that covers how to test your driver in devstack with Tempest, which will avoid this problem. [1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder#Configuring_devstack_to_use_your_driver_and_backend -- Mike Perez ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [HEAT] Qestions on adding a new Software Config element for Opscode Chef
Hi, All:We are trying to leverage Heat software config model to support Chef-based software installation. Currently the chef-based software config is not in place with Heat version 0.2.9.Therefore, we do have a number of questions on the implementation by ourselves:1. Should we create new software config child resource types (e.g.OS::Heat::SoftwareConfig::Chef and OS::Heat::SoftwareDeployment::Chef proposed in thehttps://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Heat/Blueprints/hot-software-config-spec) or should we reuse the existing software config resource type (e.g. OS::Heat::SoftwareConfig by leveraging group attribute) like the following example with Puppet? What are the pros and cons with either approach?config:type:OS::Heat::SoftwareConfigproperties:group:puppetinputs:-name:foo-name:baroutputs:-name:resultconfig:get_file:config-scripts/example-puppet-manifest.ppdeployment:type:OS::Heat::SoftwareDeploymentproperties:config:get_resource:configserver:get_resource:serverinput_values:foo:fobar:ba2. Regarding OpsCode Chef and Heat integration, should our software config support chef-solo only, or should support Chef server? In another word, should we let Heat to do the orchestration for the chef-based software install or should we continue to use chef-server for the chef-based software install?3. In the current implementation of software config hook for puppet as follows:heat-templates/hot/software-config/elements/heat-config-puppet/install.d/50-heat-config-hook-puppet3.1 why we need a 50-* as a prefix for the heat-config hook name?3.2 In the script as follows, what is the "install-packages" script? where does it load puppet package? How would we change the script to install chef package?#!/bin/bashset-xSCRIPTDIR=$(dirname$0)install-packages puppetinstall -D -g root -o root -m0755${SCRIPTDIR}/hook-puppet.py /var/lib/heat-config/hooks/puppet4. Withdiskimage-builder, we can build in images with many software config elements(chef, puppet, script, salt), which means there will be many hooks in the image.However, By reading the source code of the os-refresh-config, it seems it will execute only the hooks which has corresponding "group" defined in the software config, is that right?definvoke_hook(c,log):# sanitise the group to get an alphanumeric hook file namehook="".join(xforxinc['group']ifx=='-'orx=='_'orx.isalnum())hook_path=os.path.join(HOOKS_DIR,hook)signal_data=Noneifnotos.path.exists(hook_path):log.warn('Skipping group%swith no hook script%s'%(c['group'],hook_path))else:Thanks a lot for your kind assistance!Thanks,Tao Tao, Ph.D.IBM T. J. Watson Research Center1101 Kitchawan RoadYorktown Heights, NY 10598Phone: (914) 945-4541Email: t...@us.ibm.com ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Glance Store Future
cc'ing ML since it's an important discussion, IMO... On 07/31/2014 11:54 AM, Arnaud Legendre wrote: Hi Jay, I would be interested if you could share your point of view on this item: we want to make the glance stores a standalone library (glance.stores) which would be consumed directly by Nova and Cinder. Yes, I have been enthusiastic about this effort for a long time now :) In fact, I have been pushing a series of patches (most merged at this point) in Nova to clean up the (very) messy nova.image.glance module and standardize the image API in Nova. The messiest part of the current image API in Nova, by far, is the nova.image.glance.GlanceImageService.download() method, which you highlight below. The reason it is so messy is that the method does different things (and returns different things!) depending on how you call it and what arguments you provide. :( I think it would be nice to get your pov since you worked a lot on the Nova image interface recently. To give you an example: Here https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/image/glance.py#L333, we would do: 1. location = get_image_location(image_id), 2. get(location) from the glance.stores library like for example rbd (https://github.com/openstack/glance/blob/master/glance/store/rbd.py#L206) Yup. Though I'd love for this code to live in olso, not glance... Plus, I'd almost prefer to see an interface that hides the location URIs entirely and makes the discovery of those location URIs entirely encapsulated within glance.store. So, for instance, instead of getting the image location using a call to glanceclient.show(), parsing the locations collection from the v2 API response, and passing that URI to the glance.store.get() function, I'd prefer to see an interface more like this: ```python # This code would go in a new nova.image.API.copy() method: import io from oslo.image import move from oslo.image.move import exception as mexc from nova import exception as exc ... def copy(image_id_or_uri, stream_writer): try: config = { # Some Nova CONF options... } mover = move.Mover(image_id_or_uri, config) success, bytes_written = mover.copy(stream_writer) if success: if bytes_written == 0: LOG.info(Copied image %s using zero-copy transfer., image_id_or_uri) else: LOG.info(Copied image %s using standard filesystem copy. Copied %d bytes., image_id_or_uri, bytes_written) return success except mexc.ImageNotFound: raise exc.NotFound(...) except mexc.ImageInvalidApi: # Fall back to pull image from Glance # API server via HTTP and write to disk # via the stream_writer argument's write() # interface... and return True or False # depending on whether write()s succeeded ``` And then, the caller of such an nova.image.API.copy() function would be in the existing various virt utils and imagebackends, and would call the API function like so: ```python # This code would go in something like nova.virt.libvirt.utils: from nova import image IMAGE_API = image.API() write_file = io.FileIO(dst_path, mode='wb') writer = io.BufferedWriter(write_file) image_id_or_uri = https://images.example.com/images/123; result = IMAGE_API.copy(image_id_or_uri, writer) # Test result if needed... ``` Notice that the caller never needs to know about the locations collection of the image -- and thus we correct the leaked implementation details that currently ooze out of the download() method in nova.image.glance.GlanceImageService.download. Also note that we no longer pass a variety of file descriptors, file writers, file destination paths to the download method. Instead, we always just pass the image ID or URI and a writeable bytestream iterator. And we always return either True or False, instead of None or a file iterator depending on the supplied arguments to download(). The same kind of logic could be added in Cinder. Sure. We see that as a benefit for Nova, which would be able to directly consume the stores instead of going through the glance api. Exactly. We had a vote today to figure out if we continue the effort on the glance.stores library. We had a majority of +1 but there was a couple of -1 due to the fact that we don’t have enough concrete examples of this will be useful or not. It will definitely be useful in the following: 1) Making the copy/zero-copy/transfer/download methods consistent between all the various places in the Nova virt drivers that do similar things. 2) Allowing a single place to innovate for the transfer of image bits between sources and destinations Hopefully, the above sample code and interfaces will spark some renewed interest in this. I'd love
Re: [openstack-dev] DevStack program change
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com wrote: I propose we de-program DevStack and consolidate it into the QA program. Some of my concerns about doing this in the beginning have proven to be a non-issue in practice. Also, I believe a program's focus can and should be wider than we have implemented up to now and this a step toward consolidating narrowly defined programs. Sounds like a good idea to me, as long as QA PTL Matt is good with it. Thanks Dean for your service! Anne I read the QA mission statement to already include DevStack's purpose so no change should be required there. I'll propose the governance changes following a few days of discussion. This is purely a program-level change, I do not anticipate changes to the DevStack project itself. dt (soon-to-be-former?) DevStack PTL -- Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Spec exceptions are closed, FPF is August 21
Hi All: There is no doubt the cores are quite stretched and it does take a finite amount of time to absorb the context and the content of the multitude of patches on any given core reviewer¹s queue. Life happens for everyone and things slip thru the cracks, but this suggestion on a timeline for reassessing the sticky -2 after a response from the patch owner seems very reasonable to adopt. It certainly helps the submitter to make forward progress rather than exit the project in frustration (I know of at least one instance with a contributor expressing this as a reason to move on) and establishes a process so that cores can rely on a automatic throttle mechanism if they suddenly find themselves dealing with other things that are a higher priority for them. Thanks Sridar From: Mandeep Dhami dh...@noironetworks.commailto:dh...@noironetworks.com Reply-To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Friday, August 1, 2014 at 4:53 AM To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Spec exceptions are closed, FPF is August 21 Hi Armando: If a core-reviewer puts a -2, there must be a good reason for it I agree. The problem is that after the initial issue identified in the initial -2 review has been fixed, and the patch updated, it (sometimes) happens that we can not get the original reviewer to re-review that update for weeks - creating the type of issues identified in this thread. I would agree that if this was a one-off scenarios, we should handling this as a specific case as you suggest. Unfortunately, this is not a one-off instance, and hence my request for clearer guidelines from PTL for such cases. Regards, Mandeep On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Armando M. arma...@gmail.commailto:arma...@gmail.com wrote: It is not my intention debating, pointing fingers and finding culprits, these issues can be addressed in some other context. I am gonna say three things: 1) If a core-reviewer puts a -2, there must be a good reason for it. If other reviewers blindly move on as some people seem to imply here, then those reviewers should probably not review the code at all! My policy is to review all the code I am interested in/I can, regardless of the score. My -1 may be someone's +1 (or vice versa), so 'trusting' someone else's vote is the wrong way to go about this. 2) If we all feel that this feature is important (which I am not sure it was being marked as 'low' in oslo, not sure how it was tracked in Neutron), there is the weekly IRC Neutron meeting to raise awareness, since all cores participate; to the best of my knowledge we never spoke (or barely) of the rootwrap work. 3) If people do want this work in Juno (Carl being one of them), we can figure out how to make one final push, and assess potential regression. We 'rushed' other features late in cycle in the past (like nova/neutron event notifications) and if we keep this disabled by default in Juno, I don't think it's really that risky. I can work with Carl to give the patches some more love. Armando On 31 July 2014 15:40, Rudra Rugge ru...@contrailsystems.commailto:ru...@contrailsystems.com wrote: Hi Kyle, I also agree with Mandeep's suggestion of putting a time frame on the lingering -2 if the addressed concerns have been taken care of. In my experience also a sticky -2 detracts other reviewers from reviewing an updated patch. Either a time-frame or a possible override by PTL (move to -1) would help make progress on the review. Regards, Rudra On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Mandeep Dhami dh...@noironetworks.commailto:dh...@noironetworks.com wrote: Hi Kyle: As -2 is sticky, and as there exists a possibility that the original core might not get time to get back to re-reviewing his, do you think that there should be clearer guidelines on it's usage (to avoid what you identified as dropping of the balls)? Salvatore had a good guidance in a related thread [0], do you agree with something like that? I try to avoid -2s as much as possible. I put a -2 only when I reckon your patch should never be merged because it'll make the software unstable or tries to solve a problem that does not exist. -2s stick across patches and tend to put off other reviewers. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-July/041339.html Or do you think that 3-5 days after an update that addresses the issues identified in the original -2, we should automatically remove that -2? If this does not happen often, this process does not have to be automated, just an exception that the PTL can exercise to address issues where the original reason for -2 has been addressed and nothing new has been identified? On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.commailto:mest...@mestery.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Yuriy Taraday
[openstack-dev] Preparing for 2014.1.2 -- branches freeze Aug 7
Hi All- We have frozen the stable/icehouse branches for intergrated projects for release Thurs August 7th in preparation for the 2014.1.2 stable release You can view the current queue of proposed patches on gerrit [1]. I'd like to request all interested parties review current bugs affecting Havana and help ensure any relevant fixes be proposed soon and merged by Thursday, or notify the stable-maint team of anything critical that may land late. Thanks chuck [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:stable/havana,n,z ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Status of A/A HA for neutron-metadata-agent?
Hey Marios, comments inline. - Original Message - Hi all, I have been asked by a colleague about the status of A/A HA for neutron-* processes. From the 'HA guide' [1], l3-agent and metadata-agent are the only neutron components that can't be deployed in A/A HA (corosync/pacemaker for a/p is documented as available 'out of the box' for both). The l3-agent work is approved for J3 [4] but I am unaware of any work on the metadata-agent and can't see any mention in [2][3]. Is this someone has looked at, or is planning to (though ultimately K would be the earliest right?)? With L3 HA turned on you can run the metadata agent on all network nodes. The active instance of each router will have the proxy up in its namespace and it will forward it to the agent as expected. thanks! marios [1] http://docs.openstack.org/high-availability-guide/content/index.html [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronJunoProjectPlan [3] https://launchpad.net/neutron/+milestone/juno-3 [4] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/neutron-specs/tree/specs/juno/l3-high-availability.rst ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][rally][qa] Application for a new OpenStack Program: Performance and Scalability
Angus, Rally is designed as an operations tool. Its purpose is to run a production cloud and give an operator tools and data to profile a production cloud. It is intended as a first of many such tools. There is a strong support in the community that operations tools should be developed as part of OpenStack and Rally is the first such successful community effort. I can envision other tools building a community around them and they too should become part of OpenStack operations tooling. Maybe Operator Tools program would be a better name? Alex Freedland Co-Founder Mirantis, Inc. On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 3:55 AM, Angus Salkeld angus.salk...@rackspace.com wrote: On Sun, 2014-07-27 at 07:57 -0700, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/26/2014 05:51 PM, Hayes, Graham wrote: On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 12:18 -0400, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/22/2014 11:58 AM, David Kranz wrote: On 07/22/2014 10:44 AM, Sean Dague wrote: Honestly, I'm really not sure I see this as a different program, but is really something that should be folded into the QA program. I feel like a top level effort like this is going to lead to a lot of duplication in the data analysis that's currently going on, as well as functionality for better load driver UX. -Sean +1 It will also lead to pointless discussions/arguments about which activities are part of QA and which are part of Performance and Scalability Testing. I think that those discussions will still take place, it will just be on a per repository basis, instead of a per program one. [snip] Right, 100% agreed. Rally would remain with it's own repo + review team, just like grenade. -Sean Is the concept of a separate review team not the point of a program? In the the thread from Designate's Incubation request Thierry said [1]: Programs just let us bless goals and teams and let them organize code however they want, with contribution to any code repo under that umbrella being considered official and ATC-status-granting. I do think that this is something that needs to be clarified by the TC - Rally could not get a PTL if they were part of the QA project, but every time we get a program request, the same discussion happens. I think that mission statements can be edited to fit new programs as they occur, and that it is more important to let teams that have been working closely together to stay as a distinct group. My big concern here is that many of the things that these efforts have been doing are things we actually want much closer to the base. For instance, metrics on Tempest runs. When Rally was first created it had it's own load generator. It took a ton of effort to keep the team from duplicating that and instead just use some subset of Tempest. Then when measuring showed up, we actually said that is something that would be great in Tempest, so whoever ran it, be it for Testing, Monitoring, or Performance gathering, would have access to that data. But the Rally team went off in a corner and did it otherwise. That's caused the QA team to have to go and redo this work from scratch with subunit2sql, in a way that can be consumed by multiple efforts. So I'm generally -1 to this being a separate effort on the basis that so far the team has decided to stay in their own sandbox instead of participating actively where many of us thing the functions should be added. I also think this isn't like Designate, because this isn't intended to be part of the integrated release. From reading Boris's email it seems like rally will provide a horizon panel and api to back it (for the operator to kick of performance runs and view stats). So this does seem like something that would be a part of the integrated release (if I am reading things correctly). Is the QA program happy to extend their scope to include that? QA could become Quality Assurance of upstream code and running OpenStack installations. If not we need to find some other program for rally. -Angus Of course you could decide to slice up the universe in a completely different way, but we have toolchains today, which I think the focus should be on participating there. -Sean ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Trove] Backup/restore namespace config move has leftovers
On 01/08/14 21:35, Denis Makogon wrote: I'd suggest to file a bug report and fix given issue. Done. https://bugs.launchpad.net/trove/+bug/1351545 I also took the opportunity to check if all the currently defined datastores had backup/restore_namespace set - they didn't, so I noted that too (I'm guessing they now actually *need* to have something set to avoid breakage)... regards Mark ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] API confusion
Hi Mike, So that looks like those docs are for the v2 LBaaS API. The CLI changes for v2 are not in yet, and the v2 API implementation code is in review right now. I am a bit worried that I do not see the v1 docs anymore because v1 will still remain until its deprecated. In fact, I'm pretty sure v2 will not be used very much in Juno because it will not have very much driver support. So this i something we will have to fix. Thanks for bring this up! -Brandon On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 13:46 -0400, Mike Spreitzer wrote: http://developer.openstack.org/api-ref-networking-v2.htmland http://docs.openstack.org/api/openstack-network/2.0/content/GET_listMembers__v2.0_pools__pool_id__members_lbaas_ext_ops_member.htmlsay that to list LB pool members, the URL to GET is /v2.0/pools/{pool_id}/members When I use the CLI (`neutron -v lb-member-list`) I see a GET on /v2.0/lb/members.json What's going on here? Thanks, Mike ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev