Open Stack

On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 11:31:40AM +0100, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04 2016, Steven Hardy wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > Firstly, I'm very sorry for the breakage here, and I agree that in general
> > a quick-revert is the best policy when something like this happens.
> 
> No problem Steven, shit happens.
> 
> It'd be even better if Heat'd move to a devstack plugin to limit this
> kind of high level latency. Just by curiosity, is there a plan for that?
> 
> > I'm a little unclear how this occurred tho, since I had a clear CI run on
> > this patch:
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/256315/
> 
> I think the dsvm tests are not the same that we run on telemetry side:
> we run it with the Gnocchi backend, whereas you're likely using the
> (old) Ceilometer backend. And that's the Gnocchi backend that has been
> broken by the original devstack change from what I saw.
> 
> Maybe Heat should also run this job, WDYT?
> 
> > Given that the review latency on Devstack is quite high, it seems possible
> > we'll land (2) before (1) lands, but if not then I'll re-propose it and
> > hopefully figure out where I went wrong with Depends-On to confirm all is
> > fixed before it lands.
> 
> Yeah, whatever fixes the issue I'm ok with. :-) If you can fix Heat
> faster, that'd be even cooler.

Ok, so status update, the relevant Heat fixes have landed (thanks to
ramishra and huangtianhua for investigating/fixing!):

https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bug/1529058

I've rechecked https://review.openstack.org/#/c/261923/1 which will
hopefully show the issue is resolved and the devstack revert can be
abandoned.

Thanks all for your patience while we worked this issue out.

Steve