[openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra] [Infra] Ocata Summit Infra Sessions Recap
joshua.hesketh at gmail.com
Wed Dec 7 05:27:06 UTC 2016
Thank you for the write up. Having missed being there in person it is much
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:56 AM, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
> I'm Cc'ing this to the openstack-infra ML but setting MFT to direct
> subsequent discussion to the openstack-dev ML so we can hopefully
> avoid further cross-posting as much as possible. If you're replying
> on a particular session topic, please update the Subject so that the
> subthreads are easier to keep straight.
> Apologies for the _extreme_ delay in getting this composed and sent
> This was primarily a brainstorming/roadmap session on possible
> future plans for the firehose.openstack.org service. Discussed was
> potential to have Zuul (post-v3) both consume and emit events over
> MQTT, as well as having StoryBoard (should probably support an
> analog of the events handled by lpmqtt at a minimum, probably easy
> to add given it already has an RabbitMQ one) and Nodepool event
> streams. The gerritbot consumer PoC was mentioned, but determined
> that it would be better to shelve that until planning for an
> Errbot-based gerritbot reimplementation is fleshed out.
> We talked about how the current logstash MQTT stream implementation,
> while interesting, has significant scaling (especially bandwidth)
> issues with the volume of logging we do in tests while only offering
> limited benefit. We could potentially make use of it in concern with
> a separate logstash for production server and Ansible logs, but it's
> efficacy for our job logs was called into question.
> We also spent much of the timeslot talking about possible
> integration with FedMesg (particularly that they're considering
> pluggable backend support which could include an MQTT
> implementation), which yields much opportunity for collaboration
> between our projects.
> One other topic which came up was how to do a future HA
> implementation, either by having publishers send to multiple brokers
> and configure consumers to have a primary/fallback behavior or my
> trying to implement a more integrated clustering solution with load
> balancing proxies. We concluded that current use cases don't demand
> anywhere near 100% message delivery and 100% uptime, so we can dig
> deeper when there's an actual use case.
> Status update and plans for task tracking
> As is traditional, we held a fishbowl on our ongoing task tracking
> woes. We started with a brief introduction of stakeholders who
> attended and the groups whose needs they were there to represent.
> After that, some presentation was made of recent StoryBoard
> development progress since Austin (including Gerrit integration,
> private story support for embargoed security issues, improved event
> timelines, better discoverability for boards and worklists, flexible
> task prioritization), as well as the existing backlog of blockers.
> We revisited the Infra spec on task tracking
> for the benefit of those present, and Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo)
> agreed to pick up and continue with the excellent stakeholder
> blocking issues outreach/coordination work begun by Anita Kuno
> Next steps for infra-cloud
> This was sort of a catch-all opportunity to hash out current plans
> and upcoming needs for the infra-cloud. We determined that the
> current heterogeneous hardware in the in-progress "chocolate" region
> should be split into two homogeneous regions named "chocolate" and
> "strawberry" (our "vanilla" region was already homogeneous). We also
> talked about ongoing work to get a quote from OSUOSL for hosting the
> hardware so that we can move it out of HPE data centers, and
> attempting to find funding once we have some figures firmed up.
> There were also some sideline discussions on possible monitoring and
> high-availability options for the underlying services.
> Containerization was, as always, brought up but the usual "not a fit
> for this use case" answers abounded. It was further suggested that
> using infra-cloud resources for things like special TripleO tests or
> Docker registry hosting were somehow in scope, but there are other
> solutions to these needs which should not be conflated with the
> purpose of the infra-cloud effort.
> Interactive infra-cloud debugging
> The original intent for this session was to try to gather
> leaders/representatives from the various projects that we're relying
> on in the infra-cloud deployment and step through an interactive
> session debugging the sorts of failures we see arise on the servers.
> The idea was that this would be potentially educational for some
> since this is a live bare metal "production" deployment of Nova,
> Neutron, Keystone, Glance, et cetera with all the warts and rough
> edges that operators handle on a daily basis but our developers may
> not have directly experienced.
> As well-intentioned as it was, the session suffered from several
> issues. First and foremost we didn't realize the Friday morning
> workroom we got was going to lack a projector (only so many people
> can gather around one laptop, and if it's mine then fewer still!).
> Trying to get people from lots of different projects to show up for
> the same slot on a day that isn't for cross-project sessions is
> pretty intractable. And then there's the fact that we were all
> approaching burnout as it was the last day of the week and coffee
> was all the way at the opposite end of the design summit space. :/
> Instead the time was spent partly continuing the "future of
> infra-cloud" discussion, and partly just talking about random things
> like troubleshooting CI jobs (some people misunderstood the session
> description and thought that's what we had planned) or general Infra
> team wishlist items. Not a complete waste, but some lessons learned
> if we ever want to try this idea again at a future summit.
> Test environment expectations
> After the morning break we managed to perk back up again and discuss
> test platform expectations. This was a remarkably productive
> brainstorming session where we assembled a rough list of
> expectations developers can and, more importantly, can't make about
> the systems on which our CI jobs run. The culmination of these
> musings can since be found in a shiny new page of the Infra Manual:
> Xenial jobs transition for stable/newton
> Another constructive session right on the heels of the last...
> planning the last mile of the cut-over from Ubuntu 14.04 to 16.04
> testing. We confirmed that we would switch all jobs for
> stable/newton as well as master (since the implementation started
> early in the Newton cycle and we need to be consistent across
> projects in a stable branch). We decided to set a date (which
> incidentally is TODAY) to finalize the transition. The plan was
> announced to the dev ML a month ago:
> The (numerous) changes in flight today to switch the lingering jobs
> are covered under a common review topic:
> Unconference afternoon
> At this stage things were starting to wind up and a lot of people
> with early departures had already bowed out. Those of us who
> remained were treated to our own room for the first time in many
> summits (no offense to the Release and QA teams, but it was nice to
> not need to share for a change). Since we were a little more at
> liberty to set our own pace this time we treated it as a sort of
> home base from which many of us set forth to pitch in on
> Infra-related planning discussions in other teams' spaces, then
> regroup and disseminate what we'd done (from translation platform
> upgrades to release automation designs).
> We also got in some good one-on-one time to work through topics
> which weren't covered in scheduled sessions, such as Zuul v3 spec
> additions or changes to the pep8 jobs to guard against missing sdist
> build dependencies. As the afternoon progressed and the crowd
> dwindled further we said our goodbyes and split up into smaller
> groups to go out for one last meal, commiserate with those who found
> themselves newly in search of employment and generally celebrate a
> successful week in Barcelona.
> That concludes my recollection of these sessions over the course of
> the week--thanks for reading this far--feel free to follow up (on
> the openstack-dev ML please) with any corrections/additions. Many
> thanks to all who attended, and to those who could not: we missed
> you. I hope to see lots of you again at the PTG in Atlanta, only a
> couple months away now. Don't forget to register and book your
> Jeremy Stanley
> OpenStack-Infra mailing list
> OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev