Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

At Wed, 1 Feb 2017 17:37:34 -0700, Kevin Benton wrote: > > [1 ] > [1.1 ] > And who said openstack wasn't growing? ;) > > I think reducing API workers is a nice quick way to bring back some > stability. > > I have spent a bunch of time digging into the OOM killer events and haven't > yet

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [release] misleading release notes

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Armando M. wrote: > I suspect what happens is that someone revises the content at a later date > and reno associated the last timestamp of the release note with release > where the change has been made? I do believe this is the case, reno puts a

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

What made most services jump +20% between mitaka and newton? Maybe there is a common cause that we can tackle. I'd also be in favor of reducing the number of workers in the gate, assuming that doesn't also substantially increase the runtime of gate jobs. Does that environment variable

[openstack-dev] [oslo][oslo.db] MySQL Cluster support

Hi Folks, I'm working on adding support for MySQL Cluster to the core OpenStack services. This will enable the community to benefit from an active/active, auto-sharding, and scale-out MySQL database. My approach is to have a single configuration setting in each core OpenStack service in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zun] Propose a change of the Zun core team membership

Thanks Hongbin and Zun Team, I'll exert my best efforts to meet the expectations. Best Regards, Kevin Zhao On 31 January 2017 at 03:34, Hongbin Lu wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks for the votes. According to the feedback, this proposal is > approved. Welcome Kevin to the

[openstack-dev] [neutron] [release] misleading release notes

Hi, There is something puzzling about release notes. I don't see 8.0.0 [1], and it looks like features released in Mitaka are being advertised as Newton features [2]. For instance, [3] 'Agent availability zones' shows as a Newton feature when I am pretty positive that it went in Mitaka [4]. I

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][neutron] bot bumping patches off gate queue

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 07:49:21AM -0800, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Armando M. wrote: > > > > > > On 1 February 2017 at 07:29, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> lately I see the requirements bot proposing new

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

And who said openstack wasn't growing? ;) I think reducing API workers is a nice quick way to bring back some stability. I have spent a bunch of time digging into the OOM killer events and haven't yet figured out why they are being triggered. There is significant swap space remaining in all of

[openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

Hi, [TL;DR]: OpenStack services have steadily increased their memory footprints. We need a concerted way to address the oom-kills experienced in the openstack gate, as we may have reached a ceiling. Now the longer version: We have been experiencing some

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Domains support

Will sure give it a try ! And from a kolla perspective, it means that this file should go in /etc/kolla/config/domains/keystone.$DOMAIN.conf in order to be pushed to the relevant containers ? Christian Tardif

Re: [openstack-dev] [ux] Future of the OpenStack UX team

Hi Thierry, > On Jan 31, 2017, at 7:10 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Shamail wrote: >>> Sorry for not noticing this thread and replying earlier. >>> >>> I've now reviewed the minutes from the meeting, and I support thingee's >>> suggestion of having a UX working group.

[openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL Voting is now open

Hello All! Elections are underway and will remain open for you to cast your vote until Feb 07, 2017 23:45 UTC. We are having elections for Ironic, Keystone, Neutron, Quality Assurance and Stable Branch Maintenance. If you are a Foundation individual member and had a commit in one of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [watcher] meeting time and location change

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 10:18:00PM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > Just talking to myself but the current eavesdrop page shows: > Page generated on 2017-01-12 15:06:44.58 UTC > > So yeah it looks like the publish job failed. Strange the publish job didn't run on the watcher update and the

[openstack-dev] [storlets] Boston OpenStack Summit presentation

Dear storleters, As the deadline approaches I was thinking about the following idea: End-to-End deep learning with OpenStack Storlets Imagine that you have a huge dataset from which you could extract information using machine learning algorithms. The problem is that datasets usually need to

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

I think Jay has phrased it perfectly. With the context of the earlier discussion and the rules put forth at the beginning of this logo creation effort, I feel like the 3.0 version is our only real option for an official mascot in line with our team’s spirit. +1 to version 3.0. Long live

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

Of the proposed logos, I do like the latest version the best. It appears friendly and fun. So I'm +1 on it. On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Pavlo Shchelokovskyy < pshchelokovs...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Hi, > > +1 to Jay, the 3.0 version looks ok - it is friendly and rocking :) > > Cheers, > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

Hi, +1 to Jay, the 3.0 version looks ok - it is friendly and rocking :) Cheers, Dr. Pavlo Shchelokovskyy Senior Software Engineer Mirantis Inc www.mirantis.com On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:38 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote: > Of the options presented, I think the new 3.0 version most

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

Of the options presented, I think the new 3.0 version most brings to mind a rocking bear. It’s still tough to be OK with a new logo, given that pixie boots is beloved by our team partially because Lucas took the time to make us one — but it seems like not accepting a new logo created by the

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Sergey (Sagi) Shnaidman for core on tripleo-ci

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 2:37 PM, John Trowbridge wrote: > > > On 01/30/2017 10:56 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> Sagi, you're now core on TripleO CI repo. Thanks for your hard work on >> tripleo-quickstart transition, and also helping by keeping CI in good >> shape, your work is

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 02/01/2017 12:24 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 01/02/17 12:15 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> What were you thinking about the messaging? TC resolution for >> deprecation of postgresql as a first class backend? >> >> If setup tools want to support things, that's fine, just they do need to >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Sergey (Sagi) Shnaidman for core on tripleo-ci

On 01/30/2017 10:56 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > Sagi, you're now core on TripleO CI repo. Thanks for your hard work on > tripleo-quickstart transition, and also helping by keeping CI in good > shape, your work is amazing! > > Congrats! > > Note: I couldn't add you to tripleo-ci group, but only

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] CI freeze and transition to quickstart

Well, even though it's an experimental job, the TLS-everywhere job (fakeha-caserver) is quite stable at the moment; I still need to add the novajoin service to it, to reflect what people will hopefully be using, but other than that it's been running and doing fine. I would like to bring up that

[openstack-dev] OpenStack Summit Boston-CFP closes February 6th

Hi Everyone- Don’t forget: the Call for Presentations for the upcoming OpenStack Summit Boston closes next week! The submission deadline is February 6, 2017 at 11:59PM PDT (February 7, 2017 at 6:59 UTC). Reminder: Proposed sessions must indicate a format: Panel, presentation or lightning

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] changing the order of values in upper-constraints.txt

Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-02-01 15:37:15 +0100: > On 2017-02-01 15:27, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > [...] > > Another option was to have the release bot continually propose > > updates to the same patch, like we do with the global requirements > > sync job. On any given day,

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

On 1/31/2017 7:28 PM, arkady.kanev...@dell.com wrote: I think Russian already owns the bear. ^ is my favorite statement of the day. Thank you. -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

I prefer our current homegrown logo. I wish we could just keep using that. On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Jay Faulkner wrote: > I concur with most of the other comments on the thread. I have a strong > preference for our existing mascot, and don’t think the new one is an >

[openstack-dev] [heat] Re-schedule for team meeting

Dear Team We have discussed in the team meeting this week about re-schedule our current meeting from Wednesday 0800 and 1500 UTC bi-weekly. As a result from last few releases, it seems we have fewer people attend 0800(and all of the attendees were also attend for 1500 meeting). For centralized

Re: [openstack-dev] [craton] Proposing Harry Harrington for Craton core

+1 to both recommendations by Sulo. Let me also add: Harry has proven himself as a strong contributor to Craton development. I have been especially impressed by how his work has helped improve the quality and consistency of our coding; often while removing large chunks of unnecessary code at the

Re: [openstack-dev] gate jobs - papercuts

Thanks Melanie! Since the last report 4 hours ago, the ServersNegativeTestJSON failed 8 more times. Is the following one of the libvirt ones? http://logs.openstack.org/24/425924/2/gate/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-linuxbridge-ubuntu-xenial/f1b9229/logs/testr_results.html.gz

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

I concur with most of the other comments on the thread. I have a strong preference for our existing mascot, and don’t think the new one is an improvement. Thanks, Jay > On Jan 31, 2017, at 12:49 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > > Hey ironic-ers, > > The foundation has

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 01/02/17 12:15 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > What were you thinking about the messaging? TC resolution for > deprecation of postgresql as a first class backend? > > If setup tools want to support things, that's fine, just they do need to > realize they are owning that support its not coming from

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 02/01/2017 12:21 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01 2017, Sean Dague wrote: > >> If setup tools want to support things, that's fine, just they do need to >> realize they are owning that support its not coming from upstream. > > The problem as I see it right now is that upstream is

Re: [openstack-dev] gate jobs - papercuts

On Wed, 1 Feb 2017 08:06:41 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Three more from this morning, at least the first one looks new: http://logs.openstack.org/04/426604/3/gate/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/708771d/logs/testr_results.html.gz

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On Wed, Feb 01 2017, Sean Dague wrote: > If setup tools want to support things, that's fine, just they do need to > realize they are owning that support its not coming from upstream. The problem as I see it right now is that upstream is schizophrenic: it seems it does not want to support nor

[openstack-dev] [TripleO][Networking] Routed Networking Deployment Specs

I have published specs [1] [2] [3] [4] and blueprints [5] [6] [7] [8] for review for Pike that cover the changes required to deploy onto routed (AKA spine-and-leaf or Clos) networks with TripleO. These need some review, and there are still some technical decisions that need to be nailed down. I

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 02/01/2017 12:12 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 01/02/17 11:42 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> As I mentioned before, I don't think it matters which of the two we pick >> - although I know _way_ more about MySQL personally and it has a much >> more proven track record at absurdly large scale - I

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 01/02/17 11:42 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > As I mentioned before, I don't think it matters which of the two we pick > - although I know _way_ more about MySQL personally and it has a much > more proven track record at absurdly large scale - I just argue that we > should pick one and then

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

Hi, I don't like the new one. I think Lucas captured it nicely. I prefer our PixieBoots. Jim, do you remember what our choices are? Could we use PixieBoots? --ruby From: Lucas Alvares Gomes Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 02/01/2017 10:06 AM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 01/02/17 10:22 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> >> I personally continue to be of the opinion that without an explicit >> vocal and well-staffed champion, supporting postgres is more trouble >> than it is worth. The vast majority of OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Domains support

Hi Christian, I added the domain support, but I didn't document it as well as I should have. Apologies! This is the config I am using to talk to a windows AD server. Hope this helps. create a domain specific file: etc/keystone/domains/keystone.$DOMAIN.conf: [ldap] use_pool = true pool_size =

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Do we really need two listening ports ?

On 02/01/2017 09:35 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 6:59 AM Thomas Goirand > wrote: > > On 02/01/2017 10:54 AM, Attila Fazekas wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Typically we have two keystone service listening on two separate

Re: [openstack-dev] [acceleration]Team Biweekly Meeting Agenda 2017.02.01

Hi Team, Thanks for participating the meeting today, we had a great session, please see the minutes here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cyborg/MeetingLogs#2017 Reminder for our PTG f2f session: it'll be a half-day or full-day session on Wed, not only an hour On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 8:55 PM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Do we really need two listening ports ?

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 3:54 AM, Attila Fazekas wrote: > Hi all, > > Typically we have two keystone service listening on two separate ports > 35357 and 5000. > > Historically one of the port had limited functionality, but today I do not > see why we want > to have two

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 01/02/17 10:22 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > I personally continue to be of the opinion that without an explicit > vocal and well-staffed champion, supporting postgres is more trouble > than it is worth. The vast majority of OpenStack deployments are on > MySQL - and what's more, the code is

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][neutron] bot bumping patches off gate queue

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Armando M. wrote: > > > On 1 February 2017 at 07:29, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> lately I see the requirements bot proposing new rebases for its >> patches (and bumping existing patch sets from the gate queue)

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][neutron] bot bumping patches off gate queue

On 1 February 2017 at 07:29, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Hi all, > > lately I see the requirements bot proposing new rebases for its > patches (and bumping existing patch sets from the gate queue) every > second hour, at least for Neutron [1], which makes it impossible to >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 02/01/2017 09:18 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 02/01/2017 10:12 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 2/1/2017 8:07 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: It's not just Nova, it's the entire set of integrated-gate jobs which dropped the postgresql job. There is a bit more history there, it's in the ML somewhere, but

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Do we really need two listening ports ?

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 6:59 AM Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 02/01/2017 10:54 AM, Attila Fazekas wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Typically we have two keystone service listening on two separate ports > > 35357 and 5000. > > > > Historically one of the port had limited functionality, but

[openstack-dev] [requirements][neutron] bot bumping patches off gate queue

Hi all, lately I see the requirements bot proposing new rebases for its patches (and bumping existing patch sets from the gate queue) every second hour, at least for Neutron [1], which makes it impossible to land the patches, and which only makes gate pre-release situation worse. On top of that,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 02/01/2017 09:12 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 2/1/2017 8:07 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> So the Ceilometer gate has been broken again by Nova today because of a >> SQL bug in the placement API with PostgreSQL. This is the second time >> that something like that happened: last

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 02/01/2017 10:12 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 2/1/2017 8:07 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: > It's not just Nova, it's the entire set of integrated-gate jobs which > dropped the postgresql job. There is a bit more history there, it's in > the ML somewhere, but it's not just like Nova decided to stop

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

On 2/1/2017 8:07 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: Hi there, So the Ceilometer gate has been broken again by Nova today because of a SQL bug in the placement API with PostgreSQL. This is the second time that something like that happened: last November¹, we also reported a bug in Nova wrt PostgreSQL.

Re: [openstack-dev] [python3][ptg][goal] planning for python 3 discussions at the PTG

On Wed, Feb 01 2017, Doug Hellmann wrote: > I've set up an etherpad for planning the python 3 goal work at the PTG > [1]. We have space set aside for Monday and Tuesday, but I know some > (all?) of the people involved will have multiple topics they need to > cover those days so I also think it

Re: [openstack-dev] gate jobs - papercuts

I actually ended-up proposing an update to the other bug, as the signature was much closed [0] andrea [0] https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1643911 [1] https://review.openstack.org/427754 On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 1:50 PM Andrea Frittoli wrote: > The first one is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-stable-maint] Stable check of openstack/ceilometer failed

thanks for bringing this up. below are the current statuses. On 01/02/17 08:30 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: >> > Build failed. >> > >> > - periodic-ceilometer-docs-mitaka >> > http://logs.openstack.org/periodic-stable/periodic-ceilometer-docs-mitaka/3774607/ >> > : SUCCESS in 4m 09s >> > -

Re: [openstack-dev] New driver project status?

Thanks Davanum. Reading through those now... On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 2:29 PM Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Neil, > > No, this has not reached a conclusion. There are 4 competing proposals > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] changing the order of values in upper-constraints.txt

On 2017-02-01 15:27, Doug Hellmann wrote: > [...] > Another option was to have the release bot continually propose > updates to the same patch, like we do with the global requirements > sync job. On any given day, that's going to cause a bunch of resets > on the patch, until we merge it. That

[openstack-dev] [python3][ptg][goal] planning for python 3 discussions at the PTG

I've set up an etherpad for planning the python 3 goal work at the PTG [1]. We have space set aside for Monday and Tuesday, but I know some (all?) of the people involved will have multiple topics they need to cover those days so I also think it would be a good idea for us to coordinate who can be

Re: [openstack-dev] New driver project status?

Neil, No, this has not reached a conclusion. There are 4 competing proposals https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/governance+branch:master+topic:formal-vote+driver-teams -- Dims On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Neil Jerram wrote: > I believe there was

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] changing the order of values in upper-constraints.txt

Excerpts from Tony Breeds's message of 2017-02-01 21:18:54 +1100: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 04:34:56PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > When I tried to merge the upper-constraints updates for the library > > releases we did today, I ran into quite a lot of merge conflicts > > with the Oslo

[openstack-dev] New driver project status?

I believe there was recently a discussion on one of the OpenStack MLs about a possible new status for driver projects. Unfortunately I'm not immediately managing to find it in the archives. Did that discussion reach a conclusion, and - if so - is that documented somewhere? Thanks, Neil

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Do we really need two listening ports ?

Le 01/02/2017 13:58, Thomas Goirand a écrit : > On 02/01/2017 10:54 AM, Attila Fazekas wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Typically we have two keystone service listening on two separate ports >> 35357 and 5000. >> >> Historically one of the port had limited functionality, but today I do >> not see why we

[openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer][postgresql][gate][telemetry] PostgreSQL gate failure (again)

Hi there, So the Ceilometer gate has been broken again by Nova today because of a SQL bug in the placement API with PostgreSQL. This is the second time that something like that happened: last November¹, we also reported a bug in Nova wrt PostgreSQL. Fortunately, Mehdi investigated and sent a

Re: [openstack-dev] gate jobs - papercuts

The first one is yet another flavour of libvirtd crash [0]: >> *** Error in `/usr/sbin/libvirtd': realloc(): invalid next size: 0x56108d7a7450 *** which adds to the list of three libvirt crash signatures listed by Jordan in [1]. I guess this new (?) signature could be incorporated in bug [2]

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-stable-maint] Stable check of openstack/ceilometer failed

-Original Message- From: A mailing list for the OpenStack Stable Branch test reports. Reply: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: February 1, 2017 at 00:11:20 To: openstack-stable-ma...@lists.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] gate jobs - papercuts

MattR, Three more from this morning, at least the first one looks new: http://logs.openstack.org/04/426604/3/gate/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/708771d/logs/testr_results.html.gz tempest.api.compute.images.test_list_image_filters

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Dmitry Tantsur and Alex Schultz as instack-undercloud cores

On 31.1.2017 19:08, Ben Nemec wrote: On 01/31/2017 11:03 AM, James Slagle wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: In the spirit of all the core team changes, here are a couple more I'd like to propose. Dmitry has been very helpful reviewing in

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Do we really need two listening ports ?

On 02/01/2017 10:54 AM, Attila Fazekas wrote: > Hi all, > > Typically we have two keystone service listening on two separate ports > 35357 and 5000. > > Historically one of the port had limited functionality, but today I do > not see why we want > to have two separate service/port from the same

[openstack-dev] [acceleration]Team Biweekly Meeting Agenda 2017.02.01

Hi Team, Please find the initial agenda at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/CyborgTeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting -- Zhipeng (Howard) Huang Standard Engineer IT Standard & Patent/IT Prooduct Line Huawei Technologies Co,. Ltd Email: huangzhip...@huawei.com Office: Huawei Industrial

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Dmitry Tantsur and Alex Schultz as instack-undercloud cores

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: > In the spirit of all the core team changes, here are a couple more I'd > like to propose. > > Dmitry has been very helpful reviewing in instack-undercloud for a long > time so this is way overdue. I'm also going to

Re: [openstack-dev] [containers][magnum] Swarm Mode template

On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 21:15 +0100, Spyros Trigazis wrote: > Hi, > > The hack-ish way is to check if the current master has a different ip > than the > swarm_api_api and based on that decide whether to swarm init or join. > The > proper way is to have two resource groups (as you said) one for the

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Dmitry Tantsur and Alex Schultz as instack-undercloud cores

+1 On 31 January 2017 at 16:02, Ben Nemec wrote: > In the spirit of all the core team changes, here are a couple more I'd > like to propose. > > Dmitry has been very helpful reviewing in instack-undercloud for a long > time so this is way overdue. I'm also going to

[openstack-dev] [QA][Nova]Libvirt frequent crashes on Ubuntu Xenial

Hi, After investigating several gate failures and thanks to logstash, I found out that Libvirtd often crashes badly on Ubuntu Xenial. I know of 3 distinct crashes, with the following fingerprints in syslog.txt * libvirtd: malloc.c:3720: _int_malloc: Assertion `(unsigned long) (size) >= (unsigned

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] New mascot design

See below. On 2017-02-01 2:37 AM, Pavlo Shchelokovskyy wrote: Hi all, this new logo actually reminds me of a wide-spread Russian meme Thanks for teaching us about this meme. The new logo has a striking similarity with the meme. Is it possible that it was an inside joke / reference to that

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Cinder with remote LVM proposal

Hi Erlon, hi Philipp thank you for your answers. I will try to explain with a real case: @Erlon: I have 2 nodes that works as a SAN with targetcli and DRBD for a raid over network. This cluster can be seen as an "ISCSI node". Furthermore, I have 2 nodes with openstack-cinder-volume (with

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Cinder with remote LVM proposal

Hi everybody, > > Hi, I'd like to know if it is possible to use openstack-cinder-volume with > > a remote LVM. This could be a new feature proposal if the idea is good. > > More precisely, I'm thinking a solution where openstack-cinder-volume runs > > on a dedicated node and LVM on another node

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Cinder with remote LVM proposal

Hi Marco, What you are proposing is almost like to create an LVM storage box. I haven't seen any real benefit from the advantages you listed. For 1), the same problems you can have upgrading the services within the same node will happen if the LVM services are not in the same host. For, 2), now

Re: [openstack-dev] [watcher] meeting time and location change

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 09:20:21PM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 10:49:28AM +0100, Antoine Cabot wrote: > > Thx Tony, I did this last week ;-) > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/425107/ > > Antoine > > Thanks! > > Hmm okay that's strange as the view I get seems t have

[openstack-dev] [craton] Proposing Harry Harrington for Craton core

Hi everyone, I would like to propose Harry Harrington @git-harry to Craton core team. He has been doing a great job with both reviewing and proposing meaningful changes to craton project. I am confident Harry will be great help as craton core member.

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Dmitry Tantsur and Alex Schultz as instack-undercloud cores

+1! On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Julie Pichon wrote: > On 31 January 2017 at 16:02, Ben Nemec wrote: > > In the spirit of all the core team changes, here are a couple more I'd > like > > to propose. > > > > Dmitry has been very helpful reviewing

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Cinder with remote LVM proposal

Hi, I'd like to know if it is possible to use openstack-cinder-volume with a remote LVM. This could be a new feature proposal if the idea is good. More precisely, I'm thinking a solution where openstack-cinder-volume runs on a dedicated node and LVM on another node (called "storage node"). On the

Re: [openstack-dev] [watcher] meeting time and location change

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 10:49:28AM +0100, Antoine Cabot wrote: > Thx Tony, I did this last week ;-) > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/425107/ > Antoine Thanks! Hmm okay that's strange as the view I get seems t have stale data. I'll check the publish jobs Tony. signature.asc Description: PGP

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] changing the order of values in upper-constraints.txt

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 04:34:56PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > When I tried to merge the upper-constraints updates for the library > releases we did today, I ran into quite a lot of merge conflicts > with the Oslo libraries. I'm exploring options for reducing the > likelihood that those sorts of

[openstack-dev] [keystone] Do we really need two listening ports ?

Hi all, Typically we have two keystone service listening on two separate ports 35357 and 5000. Historically one of the port had limited functionality, but today I do not see why we want to have two separate service/port from the same code base for similar purposes. Effective we use double

Re: [openstack-dev] [watcher] meeting time and location change

Thx Tony, I did this last week ;-) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/425107/ Antoine On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 10:06:37AM +0100, Antoine Cabot wrote: >> Hi Watcher team, >> >> I changed time & location of our weekly

Re: [openstack-dev] [watcher] meeting time and location change

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 10:06:37AM +0100, Antoine Cabot wrote: > Hi Watcher team, > > I changed time & location of our weekly meeting on odd weeks. Today, > it will be at 13:00 UTC on #openstack-meeting-alt. Care to submit a review to openstack-infra/irc-meetings so that

[openstack-dev] [watcher] meeting time and location change

Hi Watcher team, I changed time & location of our weekly meeting on odd weeks. Today, it will be at 13:00 UTC on #openstack-meeting-alt. Thanks, Antoine __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Dmitry Tantsur and Alex Schultz as instack-undercloud cores

On 31 January 2017 at 16:02, Ben Nemec wrote: > In the spirit of all the core team changes, here are a couple more I'd like > to propose. > > Dmitry has been very helpful reviewing in instack-undercloud for a long time > so this is way overdue. I'm also going to propose

[openstack-dev] [storlets]

Hi all, I will create the stable/ocata branch tomorrow my end of day. Would be great if we can land the python functional tests. Thanks! Eran __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposing Dmitry Tantsur and Alex Schultz as instack-undercloud cores

+1 On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:02:06AM -0600, Ben Nemec wrote: > In the spirit of all the core team changes, here are a couple more I'd like > to propose. > > Dmitry has been very helpful reviewing in instack-undercloud for a long time > so this is way overdue. I'm also going to propose that he