September 2019 - openstack-discuss

[goals][IPv6-Only Deployments and Testing] Week R-4 Update
by Ghanshyam Mann 18 Sep '19

18 Sep '19

Hello Everyone, Below is the progress on Ipv6 goal during R6 week. I started the legacy job for IPv6 deployment with duplicating the run.yaml which is the only best way to do. Summary: The projects still need to prepare the IPv6 job: * Ec2-Api * Freezer * Heat * Ironic * Karbor * Kolla * Kuryr * Magnum * Manila * Masakari * Mistral * Murano * Octavia * Swift The projects waiting for IPv6 job patch to merge: If patch is failing, help me to debug that otherwise review and merge. * Barbican * Blazar * Cyborg * Tricircle * Vitrage * Zaqar * Cinder * Glance * Monasca * Neutron * Qinling * Quality Assurance * Sahara * Searchlight * Senlin * Tacker The projects have merged the IPv6 jobs: * Designate * Murano * Trove * Cloudkitty * Congress * Horizon * Keystone * Nova * Placement * Solum * Telemetry * Watcher * Zun The projects do not need the IPv6 job (CLI, lib, deployment projects etc ): If anything I missed and IPv6 job need, please reply otherwise I will mark their task in storyboard as invalid. * Adjutant * Documentation * I18n * Infrastructure * Loci * Openstack Charms * Openstack-Chef * Openstack-Helm * Openstackansible * Openstackclient * Openstacksdk * Oslo * Packaging-Rpm * Powervmstackers * Puppet Openstack * Rally * Release Management * Requirements * Storlets * Tripleo * Winstackers Storyboard: ========= - https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2005477 IPv6 missing support found: ===================== 1. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673397/ 2. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673449/ 3. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/677524/ How you can help: ============== - Each project needs to look for and review the ipv6 job patch. - Verify it works fine on ipv6 and no ipv4 used in conf etc - Any other specific scenario needs to be added as part of project IPv6 verification. - Help on debugging and fix the bug in IPv6 job is failing. Everything related to this goal can be found under this topic: Topic: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:ipv6-only-deployment-and-testing+(stat… How to define and run new IPv6 Job on project side: ======================================= - I prepared a wiki page to describe this section - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Goal-IPv6-only-deployments-and-testing Review suggestion: ============== - Main goal of these jobs will be whether your service is able to listen on IPv6 and can communicate to any other services either OpenStack or DB or rabbitmq etc on IPv6 or not. So check your proposed job with that point of view. If anything missing, comment on patch. - One example was - I missed to configure novnc address to IPv6- https://review.opendev.org/#/c/672493/ - base script as part of 'devstack-tempest-ipv6' will do basic checks for endpoints on IPv6 and some devstack var setting. But if your project needs more specific verification then it can be added in project side job as post-run playbooks as described in wiki page[1]. [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Goal-IPv6-only-deployments-and-testing -gmann

7 15

Re: [Horizon] Paging and Angular...
by Marek Lyčka 18 Sep '19

18 Sep '19

Hello, > You seem to be missing the point. The alternative to Angular is not JQuery, it's a proper implementation on the server-side, > both in the APIs (for pagination and filtering) and Horizon itself. Slapping JavaScript on top of it, whether it's Angular or > JQuery, won't improve the situation. No, I understand what you're saying, I just don't think it's very realistic. Exclusively using server side templating has some issues in terms of usability and performance which might not have satisfactory solutions. For example: - Any interaction causes a roundtrip to the web server and the backend API, which reduces performance, especially with large data sets. - In some cases, datasets are composed of multiple API calls with disjunct results (see Networks [1] for an example). Paging and sorting over these datasets requires for them to be reconstructed on the webserver for every paging or sorting request and that means a full data load. For any at least somewhat sizeable datasets, this creates performance issues. - UI loses reactivity. Interfield interactions, for example, are basically impossible because of web server centered re-rendering, which reduces user comfort and usability. Moving logic to the client using JavaScript does improve the situation: - Data can be loaded in chunks asynchronously in the background without impeding the rest of Horizon - Cached data can be operated on (paged, sorted...) without additional requests to the web server and backend - Data can be shared between different horizon elements without the need for a reload - e.g. loaded networks can be used in the network index table, the Launch instance dialog and Network Topology all without loading it separately for each. Additionally, JavaScript also allows for more advanced tools, such as the Network Topology views (admittedly, they also require a fair amount of work). These are just some examples to illustrate the point. I'm sure other use cases could be found. [1] https://github.com/openstack/horizon/blob/fa804370b11519fc261f73fa90177368f… po 16. 9. 2019 v 10:43 odesílatel Radomir Dopieralski < openstack(a)sheep.art.pl> napsal: > You seem to be missing the point. The alternative to Angular is not > JQuery, it's a proper implementation on the server-side, both in the APIs > (for pagination and filtering) and Horizon itself. Slapping JavaScript on > top of it, whether it's Angular or JQuery, won't improve the situation. > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:21 PM Marek Lyčka <marek.lycka(a)ultimum.io> > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> > We can't review your patches, because we don't understand them. For the >> patches to be merged, we >> > need more than one person, so that they can review each other's patches. >> >> Well, yes. That's what I'm trying to address. Even if another person >> appeared to review >> javascript code, it wouldn't change anything unless he had +2 and +W >> rights though. And even then, >> it wouldn't be enough, because two +2 are currently expected for the CR >> process to go ahead. >> >> > JavaScript is fine. We all know how to write and how to review >> JavaScript code, and there doesn't >> > have to be much of it — Horizon is not the kind of tool that has to bee >> all shiny and animated. It's a tool >> > for getting work done. >> >> This isn't about being shiny and animated though. This is about basic >> functionality, usability and performance. >> I did some stress testing with large datasets [1], and the >> non-angularized versions of basic functionality like >> sorting, paging and filtering in table panels are either non-existent, >> not working at all or basically unusable >> (for a multitude of reasons). >> >> Removing them would force reimplementations in pure JQuery and I strongly >> suspect that those >> implementations would be much messier and cost a considerable amount of >> time and effort. >> >> >AngularJS is a problem, because you can't tell what the code does just >> by looking >> >at the code, and so you can neither review nor fix it. >> >> This is clearly a matter of opinion. I find Angular code easier to deal >> with than JQuery spaghetti. >> >> > There has been a lot of work put into mixing Horizon with Angular, but >> I disagree that it has solved problems, >> > and in fact it has introduced a lot of regressions. >> >> I'm not saying the NG implementations are perfect, but they mostly work >> where it counts and can be improved >> where they do not. >> >> > Just to take a simple example, the translations are currently broken >> for en.AU and en.GB languages, >> > and date display is not localized. And nobody cares. >> >> It's difficult for me to judge which features are broken in NG and how >> much interest there is in having them >> fixed, but they can be fixed once reported. What I can say for sure is >> that I keep hitting this issue >> because of actual feature requests from actual users. See [2] for an >> example. I'm not sure implementing >> that in pure JQuery would be nearly as simple as it was in Angular. >> >> > We had automated tests before Angular. There weren't many of them, >> because we also didn't have much >> > JavaScript code. If I remember correctly, those tests were ripped out >> during the Angularization. >> >> Fair enough. >> >> > Arguably, improvements are, on average, impossible to add to Angular >> >> I disagree. Yes, pure JQuery is probably easier when dealing with very >> simple things, but once feature >> complexity increases beyond the basics, you'll very quickly find the >> features offered by the framework >> relevant - things like MVC decoupling, browser-side templating, reusable >> components, functionality injection etc. >> Again, see [2] for an example. >> >> On a side note, some horizon plugins (such as octavia-dashboard) use >> Angular extensively. Removing it >> would at the very least break them. >> >> Whatever the community decision is though, I feel like it needs to be >> made so that related issues >> can be addressed with a reasonable expectation of being reviewed and >> merged. >> >> [1] Networks, Roles and Images in the low thousands >> [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/618173/ >> >> pá 6. 9. 2019 v 18:44 odesílatel Dale Bewley <dale(a)bewley.net> napsal: >> >>> As an uninformed user I would just like to say Horizon is seen _as_ >>> Openstack to new users and I appreciate ever effort to improve it. >>> >>> Without discounting past work, the Horizon experience leaves much to be >>> desired and it colors the perspective on the entire platform. >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 05:01 Radomir Dopieralski <openstack(a)sheep.art.pl> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 11:33 AM Marek Lyčka <marek.lycka(a)ultimum.io> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> > we need people familiar with Angular and Horizon's ways of using >>>>> Angular (which seem to be very >>>>> > non-standard) that would be willing to write and review code. >>>>> Unfortunately the people who originally >>>>> > introduced Angular in Horizon and designed how it is used are no >>>>> longer interested in contributing, >>>>> > and there don't seem to be any new people able to handle this. >>>>> >>>>> I've been working with Horizon's Angular for quite some time and don't >>>>> mind keeping at it, but >>>>> it's useless unless I can get my code merged, hence my original >>>>> message. >>>>> >>>>> As far as attracting new developers goes, I think that removing some >>>>> barriers to entry couldn't hurt - >>>>> seeing commits simply lost to time being one of them. I can see it as >>>>> being fairly demoralizing. >>>>> >>>> >>>> We can't review your patches, because we don't understand them. For the >>>> patches to be merged, we >>>> need more than one person, so that they can review each other's patches. >>>> >>>> >>>>> > Personally, I think that a better long-time strategy would be to >>>>> remove all >>>>> > Angular-based views from Horizon, and focus on maintaining one >>>>> language and one set of tools. >>>>> >>>>> Removing AngularJS wouldn't remove JavaScript from horizon. We'd still >>>>> be left with a home-brewish >>>>> framework (which is buggy as is). I don't think removing js completely >>>>> is realistic either: we'd lose >>>>> functionality and worsen user experience. I think that keeping Angular >>>>> is the better alternative: >>>>> >>>>> 1) A lot of work has already been put into Angularization, solving >>>>> many problems >>>>> 2) Unlike legacy js, Angular code is covered by automated tests >>>>> 3) Arguably, improvments are, on average, easier to add to Angular >>>>> than pure js implementations >>>>> >>>>> Whatever reservations there may be about the current implementation >>>>> can be identified and addressed, but >>>>> all in all, I think removing it at this point would be >>>>> counterproductive. >>>>> >>>> >>>> JavaScript is fine. We all know how to write and how to review >>>> JavaScript code, and there doesn't >>>> have to be much of it — Horizon is not the kind of tool that has to bee >>>> all shiny and animated. It's a tool >>>> for getting work done. AngularJS is a problem, because you can't tell >>>> what the code does just by looking >>>> at the code, and so you can neither review nor fix it. >>>> >>>> There has been a lot of work put into mixing Horizon with Angular, but >>>> I disagree that it has solved problems, >>>> and in fact it has introduced a lot of regressions. Just to take a >>>> simple example, the translations are currently >>>> broken for en.AU and en.GB languages, and date display is not >>>> localized. And nobody cares. >>>> >>>> We had automated tests before Angular. There weren't many of them, >>>> because we also didn't have much JavaScript code. >>>> If I remember correctly, those tests were ripped out during the >>>> Angularization. >>>> >>>> Arguably, improvements are, on average, impossible to add to Angular, >>>> because the code makes no sense on its own. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> -- >> Marek Lyčka >> Linux Developer >> >> Ultimum Technologies s.r.o. >> Na Poříčí 1047/26, 11000 Praha 1 >> Czech Republic >> >> marek.lycka(a)ultimum.io <stanislav.ulrych(a)ultimum.io> >> *https://ultimum.io <https://ultimum.io/>* >> > -- Marek Lyčka Linux Developer Ultimum Technologies s.r.o. Na Poříčí 1047/26, 11000 Praha 1 Czech Republic marek.lycka(a)ultimum.io <stanislav.ulrych(a)ultimum.io> *https://ultimum.io <https://ultimum.io/>*

2 1

[openstack-ansible] office hours
by Mohammed Naser 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

Hi everyone, Here’s the update of what happened in this week’s OpenStack Ansible Office Hours. The upgrade jobs are going well and passing. CentOD is taking longer but we can reduce the time it takes if we skip tempest tests after Stein deployment (by changing the order of passed arguments to the ansible-playbook). Milestone was updated but we’re waiting on the Keystone bug to get resolved before merging it. We’ll have to work on Tempest in order to get that fixed with the proper testing. For Swift, we talked about editing our job templates to remove testing as we transition to Python 3. We’ll propose a patch and a revert at the same time to not forget about fixing it later. Neutron and Calico are having problems with Python3 and we discussed going through distro variables to make sure Ubuntu is using Python3 everywhere. Bind-to-mgmt needs a little more work until we can land it. We need to cut back on variables because right now there are too many. We also want to add a global variable in each role corresponding to the mgmt-addr. We think we’re getting closer to knowing what is breaking with CentOS 7.7. As for Galera, we abandoned the patch and replaced the bind addrs but we still need to figure out why it’s still breaking on the integrated repository. Thanks! Regards, Mohammed -- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser(a)vexxhost.com W. http://vexxhost.com

2 1

[all][interop][cinder][qa] API changes with/without microversion and Tempest verification of API interoperability
by Ghanshyam Mann 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

Hello Everyone, As per discussion over ML, Tempest started the JSON schema strict validation for Volume APIs response [1]. Because it may affect the interop certification, it was explained to the Interop team as well as in the Board of Director meeting[2]. In Train, Tempest started implementing the validation and found an API change where the new field was added in API response without versioning[3] (Cinder has API microversion mechanism). IMO, that was not the correct way to change the API and as per API-WG guidelines[4] any field added/modified/removed in API should be with microverison(means old versions/user should not be affected by that change) and must for API interoperability. With JSON schema validation, Tempest verifies the API interoperability recommended behaviour by API-WG. But as per IRC conversion with cinder team, we have different opinion on API interoperability and how API should be changed under microversion mechanism. I would like to have a conclusion on this so that Tempest can verify or leave the Volume API for strict validation. [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-November/000358… [2] - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003652.ht… - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003655.ht… [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bug/1843762 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/439461/ [4] https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/guidelines/api_interoperabilit… -gmann

8 21

[goals][IPv6-Only Deployments and Testing] Week R-4 Update-2
by Ghanshyam Mann 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

Hello Everyone, Below is the latest updated on IPv6 goal. All the projects have the patch proposed now. Next step is to review then as per mentioned guidelines below or help in debugging the failure if any. Summary: The projects still need to prepare the IPv6 job: * None The projects waiting for IPv6 job patch to merge: If patch is failing, help me to debug that otherwise review and merge. * Barbican * Blazar * Cyborg * Tricircle * Vitrage * Zaqar * Cinder * Glance * Monasca * Neutron * Qinling * Sahara * Searchlight * Senlin * Tacker * Ec2-Api * Freezer * Heat * Ironic * Karbor * Kuryr * Magnum * Manila * Masakari * Mistral * Murano * Octavia (johnsom is working on this and will take over the base patch) * Swift The projects have merged the IPv6 jobs: * Designate * Murano * Trove * Cloudkitty * Congress * Horizon * Keystone * Nova * Placement * Solum * Telemetry * Watcher * Zun The projects do not need the IPv6 job (CLI, lib, deployment projects etc ): I have marked the tasks for below project as invalid. * Adjutant * Documentation * I18n * Infrastructure * Kolla * Loci * Openstack Charms * Openstack-Chef * Openstack-Helm * Openstackansible * Openstackclient * Openstacksdk * Oslo * Packaging-Rpm * Powervmstackers * Puppet Openstack * Rally * Release Management * Requirements * Storlets * Tripleo * Winstackers Storyboard: ========= - https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2005477 IPv6 missing support found: ===================== 1. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673397/ 2. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/673449/ 3. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/677524/ How you can help: ============== - Each project needs to look for and review the ipv6 job patch. - Verify it works fine on ipv6 and no ipv4 used in conf etc - Any other specific scenario needs to be added as part of project IPv6 verification. - Help on debugging and fix the bug in IPv6 job is failing. Everything related to this goal can be found under this topic: Topic: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:ipv6-only-deployment-and-testing+(stat… How to define and run new IPv6 Job on project side: ======================================= - I prepared a wiki page to describe this section - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Goal-IPv6-only-deployments-and-testing Review suggestion: ============== - Main goal of these jobs will be whether your service is able to listen on IPv6 and can communicate to any other services either OpenStack or DB or rabbitmq etc on IPv6 or not. So check your proposed job with that point of view. If anything missing, comment on patch. - One example was - I missed to configure novnc address to IPv6- https://review.opendev.org/#/c/672493/ - base script as part of 'devstack-tempest-ipv6' will do basic checks for endpoints on IPv6 and some devstack var setting. But if your project needs more specific verification then it can be added in project side job as post-run playbooks as described in wiki page[1]. [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Goal-IPv6-only-deployments-and-testing

1 0

[PTLs] [TC] OpenStack User Survey - PTL & TC Feedback
by Jimmy McArthur 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

Hi everyone - It's that time again where we share the project specific feedback from the user survey directly with you, the community There are two CSVs, one with all of the feedback[1] and another with a question key[2] so you have some context for the answers. The data in these spreadsheets is 100% anonymized and contains NO information around the actual deployments. These are simply answers to the project-specific and TC questions that were added to the end of the survey. If you are a PTL or TC member and would like specific/expanded information around a particular comment, please contact allison(a)openstack.org or jimmy(a)openstack.org. We will do our best to accommodate, provided it doesn't violate the privacy of the submitter. Please let me know if you have questions/concerns. Cheers, Jimmy [1] 2019 User Survey Data - Deployment PTL Comments.csv [2] 2019 User Survey Data - PTL Answer Key.csv

1 0

[magnum] New weekly meeting time
by feilong 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

Hi team, As we discussed on IRC, the new Magnum weekly meeting time will be each Wednesday 9:00AM UTC on #openstack-containers channel. -- Cheers & Best regards, Feilong Wang (王飞龙) ------------------------------------------------------ Senior Cloud Software Engineer Tel: +64-48032246 Email: flwang(a)catalyst.net.nz Catalyst IT Limited Level 6, Catalyst House, 150 Willis Street, Wellington ------------------------------------------------------

1 0

[kolla] State of ppc64le support
by Marcin Juszkiewicz 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

About 2.5 years ago I added AArch64 (64-bit ARM) architecture support to Kolla project. Side effect of that work was adding ppc64le (64-bit Power, Little Endian) support. Time passed, from time to time someone jumped to the irc channel and said that they use it. No one in core team spent much time on supporting it as it was outside of our interest. >From time to time I was reserving Power machine in Red Hat to do build and check how we are with ppc64le support. This week I did that again. >From 3 distributions we target only Debian/source combo was buildable. CentOS builds lack 'rabbitmq' 3.7.10 (we use external repo) and 'gnocchi' binary images are not buildable due to lack of some packages (issue already reported to CentOS by TripleO team). Ubuntu builds lack MariaDB 10.3 because upstream repo is broken. Packages index is provided for 'ppc64le' but no packages so we get 404 errors. Due to all those issues and fact that there are no users of ppc64le Kolla containers I want to drop support for it in this cycle. Any objections?

4 6

[ansible-sig] weekly meeting summary
by Mohammed Naser 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

Hi everyone, On Friday, September 13th we had our first ever openstack-ansible-sig meeting and here’s a summary of what we talked about. The goal of this group would be to collaborate on points that will lower the tech-debt of all our projects. We think there are a few things we can work on like spanning roles, modules, plugins, patterns, etc. We mentioned wanting to work on the os-tempest role, the config-template, the connection plugin or mitogen if we can extract only the connection stacking parts. We’ll start working on the connection plugins and try to upstream when it’s ready. owalsh has been working on the docker plugin, so he should have his docker bits in a repository soon so we can push them into the forked connection plugin. We discussed getting Kolla into working on tempest things alongside OSA and TripleO in order to make it better. We’ll also start working on the Ansible RFE regarding connection plugins.. Thanks for tuning in! Regards, Mohammed -- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser(a)vexxhost.com W. http://vexxhost.com

1 0

[tc] weekly update
by Mohammed Naser 17 Sep '19

17 Sep '19

Hi everyone, Here’s the update for what happened in the OpenStack TC this week. You can get more information by checking for changes in openstack/governance repository. # New projects - charm-cinder-purestorage (under charm-cinder) # Retired projects - networking-generic-switch-tempest-plugin (under ironic) # General changes - Date changes, role resets and member additions to the OpenStack Governance member list: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/680356/ - Changes in the OpenStack Governance house-rules. TC members will be able to approve fast-tracked changes: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/678212/ - Update elections results: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/680507/ Thanks! Regards, Mohammed -- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser(a)vexxhost.com W. http://vexxhost.com

1 0