[openstack-dev] [elastic-recheck] Thoughts on next steps
mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Tue Jan 7 23:20:12 UTC 2014
On 1/2/2014 8:29 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> A lot of elastic recheck this fall has been based on the ad hoc needs of
> the moment, in between diving down into the race bugs that were
> uncovered by it. This week away from it all helped provide a little
> perspective on what I think we need to do to call it *done* (i.e.
> something akin to a 1.0 even though we are CDing it).
> Here is my current thinking on the next major things that should happen.
> Opinions welcomed.
> (These are roughly in implementation order based on urgency)
> = Split of web UI =
> The elastic recheck page is becoming a mismash of what was needed at the
> time. I think what we really have emerging is:
> * Overall Gate Health
> * Known (to ER) Bugs
> * Unknown (to ER) Bugs - more below
> I think the landing page should be Know Bugs, as that's where we want
> both bug hunters to go to prioritize things, as well as where people
> looking for known bugs should start.
> I think the overall Gate Health graphs should move to the zuul status
> page. Possibly as part of the collection of graphs at the bottom.
> We should have a secondary page (maybe column?) of the un-fingerprinted
> recheck bugs, largely to use as candidates for fingerprinting. This will
> let us eventually take over /recheck.
> = Data Analysis / Graphs =
> I spent a bunch of time playing with pandas over break
> (http://dague.net/2013/12/30/ipython-notebook-experiments/), it's kind
> of awesome. It also made me rethink our approach to handling the data.
> I think the rolling average approach we were taking is more precise than
> accurate. As these are statistical events they really need error bars.
> Because when we have a quiet night, and 1 job fails at 6am in the
> morning, the 100% failure rate it reflects in grenade needs to be
> quantified that it was 1 of 1, not 50 of 50.
> So my feeling is we should move away from the point graphs we have, and
> present these as weekly and daily failure rates (with graphs and error
> bars). And slice those per job. My suggestion is that we do the actual
> visualization with matplotlib because it's super easy to output that
> from pandas data sets.
> Basically we'll be mining Elastic Search -> Pandas TimeSeries ->
> transforms and analysis -> output tables and graphs. This is different
> enough from our current jquery graphing that I want to get ACKs before
> doing a bunch of work here and finding out people don't like it in reviews.
> Also in this process upgrade the metadata that we provide for each of
> those bugs so it's a little more clear what you are looking at.
> = Take over of /recheck =
> There is still a bunch of useful data coming in on "recheck bug ####"
> data which hasn't been curated into ER queries. I think the right thing
> to do is treat these as a work queue of bugs we should be building
> patterns out of (or completely invalidating). I've got a preliminary
> gerrit bulk query piece of code that does this, which would remove the
> need of the daemon the way that's currently happening. The gerrit
> queries are a little long right now, but I think if we are only doing
> this on hourly cron, the additional load will be negligible.
> This would get us into a single view, which I think would be more
> informative than the one we currently have.
> = Categorize all the jobs =
> We need a bit of refactoring to let us comment on all the jobs (not just
> tempest ones). Basically we assumed pep8 and docs don't fail in the gate
> at the beginning. Turns out they do, and are good indicators of infra /
> external factor bugs. They are a part of the story so we should put them
> = Multi Line Fingerprints =
> We've definitely found bugs where we never had a really satisfying
> single line match, but we had some great matches if we could do multi line.
> We could do that in ER, however it will mean giving up logstash as our
> UI, because those queries can't be done in logstash. So in order to do
> this we'll really need to implement some tools - cli minimum, which will
> let us easily test a bug. A custom web UI might be in order as well,
> though that's going to be it's own chunk of work, that we'll need more
> volunteers for.
> This would put us in a place where we should have all the infrastructure
> to track 90% of the race conditions, and talk about them in certainty as
> 1%, 5%, 0.1% bugs.
Let's add regexp query support to elastic-recheck so that I could have
fixed this better:
Then I could have just filtered the build_name with this:
More information about the OpenStack-dev