January 2020 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[qa][infra][stable] Stable branches gate status: tempest-full-* jobs failing for stable/ocata|pike|queens
by Ghanshyam Mann 09 Jan '20

09 Jan '20

Hello Everyone, tempest-full-* jobs are failing on stable/queens, stable/pike, and stable/ocata(legacy-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ocata) [1].ld Please hold any recheck till fix is merged. whoami-rajat reported about the tempest-full-queens-py3 job failure and later while debugging we found that same is failing for pike and ocata(job name there - legacy-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ocata). Failure is due to "Timeout on connecting the vnc console url" because there is no 'n-cauth' service running which is required for these stable branches. In Ussuri that service has been removed from nova. 'n-cauth' has been removed from ENABLED_SERVICES recently in - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/700217/ which effected only stable branches till queens. stable/rocky|stein are working because we have moved the services enable things from devstack-gate's test matrix to devstack base job[2]. Patch[2] was not backported to stable/queens and stable/pike which I am not sure why. We have two ways to fix the stable branches gate: 1. re-enable the n-cauth in devstack-gate. Hope all other removes services create no problem. pros: easy to fix, fix for all three stable branches. patch- https://review.opendev.org/#/c/701404/ 2. Backport the 546765[2] to stable/queens and stable/pike. pros: this removes the dependency form test-matrix which is the overall goal to remove d-g dependency. cons: It cannot be backported to stable/ocata as no zuulv3 base jobs there. This is already EM and anyone still cares about this? I think for fixing the gate (Tempest master and stable/queens|pike|ocata), we can go with option 1 and later we backport the devstack migration. [1] - http://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-queens-py3 - http://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-pike - http://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=legacy-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-… - reported bug - https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1858666 [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/546765/ -gmann

1 1

[tripleo] tripleo-operator-ansible start and request for input
by Alex Schultz 09 Jan '20

09 Jan '20

[Hello folks, I've begun the basic start of the tripleo-operator-ansible collection work[0]. At the start of this work, I've chosen the undercloud installation[1] as the first role to use to figure out how we the end user's to consume these roles. I wanted to bring up this initial implementation so that we can discuss how folks will include these roles. The initial implementation is a wrapper around the tripleoclient command as run via openstackclient. This means that the 'tripleo-undercloud' role provides implementations for 'openstack undercloud backup', 'openstack undercloud install', and 'openstack undercloud upgrade'. In terms of naming conventions, I'm proposing that we would name the roles "tripleo-<command-base>" with the last part of the command action being an "action". Examples: "openstack undercloud *" -> role: tripleo-undercloud action: (backup|install|upgrade) "openstack undercloud minion *" -> role: tripleo-undercloud-minion action: (install|upgrade) "openstack overcloud *" -> role: tripleo-overcloud action: (deploy|delete|export) "openstack overcloud node *" -> role: tripleo-overcloud-node action: (import|introspect|provision|unprovision) In terms of end user interface, I've got two proposals out in terms of possible implementations. Tasks from method: The initial commit propose that we would require the end user to use an include_role/tasks_from call to perform the desired action. For example: - hosts: undercloud gather_facts: true tasks: - name: Install undercloud collections: - tripleo.operator import_role: name: tripleo-undercloud tasks_from: install vars: tripleo_undercloud_debug: true Variable switch method: I've also proposed an alternative implementation[2] that would use include_role but require the end user to set a specific variable to change if the role runs 'install', 'backup' or 'upgrade'. With this patch the playbook would look something like: - hosts: undercloud gather_facts: true tasks: - name: Install undercloud collections: - tripleo.operator import_role: name: tripleo-undercloud vars: tripleo_undercloud_action: install tripleo_undercloud_debug: true I would like to solicit feedback on which one of these is the preferred integration method when calling these roles. I have two patches up in tripleo-quickstart-extras to show how these calls could be run. The "Tasks from method" can be viewed here[3]. The "Variable switch method" can be viewed here[4]. I can see pros and cons for both methods. My take would be: Tasks from method: Pros: - action is a bit more explicit - dynamic logic left up to the playbook/consumer. - May not have a 'default' action (as main.yml is empty, though it could be implemented). - tasks_from would be a global implementation across all roles rather than having a changing variable name. Cons: - internal task file names must be known by the consumer (though IMHO this is no different than the variable name + values in the other implementation) - role/action inclusions is not dynamic in the role (it can be in the playbook) Variable switch method: Pros: - inclusion of the role by default runs an install - action can be dynamically changed from the calling playbook via an ansible var - structure of the task files is internal to the role and the user of the role need not know the filenames/structure. Cons: - calling playbook is not explicit in that the action can be switched dynamically (e.g. intentionally or accidentally because it is dynamic) - implementer must know to configure a variable called `tripleo_undercloud_action` to switch between install/backup/upgrade actions - variable names are likely different depending on the role My personal preference might be to use the "Tasks from method" because it would lend itself to the same implementation across all roles and the dynamic logic is left to the playbook rather than internally in the role. For example, we'd end up with something like: - hosts: undercloud gather_facts: true collections: - tripleo.operator tasks: - name: Install undercloud import_role: name: tripleo-undercloud tasks_from: install vars: tripleo_undercloud_debug: true - name: Upload images import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud-images tasks_from: upload vars: tripleo_overcloud_images_debug: true - name: Import nodes import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud-node tasks_from: import vars: tripleo_overcloud_node_debug: true tripleo_overcloud_node_import_file: instack.json - name: Introspect nodes import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud-node tasks_from: introspect vars: tripleo_overcloud_node_debug: true tripleo_overcloud_node_introspect_all_manageable: True tripleo_overcloud_node_introspect_provide: True - name: Overcloud deploy import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud tasks_from: deploy vars: tripleo_overcloud_debug: true tripleo_overcloud_deploy_environment_files: - /home/stack/params.yaml The same general tasks performed via the "Variable switch method" would look something like: - hosts: undercloud gather_facts: true collections: - tripleo.operator tasks: - name: Install undercloud import_role: name: tripleo-undercloud vars: tripleo_undercloud_action: install tripleo_undercloud_debug: true - name: Upload images import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud-images vars: tripleo_overcloud_images_action: upload tripleo_overcloud_images_debug: true - name: Import nodes import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud-node vars: tripleo_overcloud_node_action: import tripleo_overcloud_node_debug: true tripleo_overcloud_node_import_file: instack.json - name: Introspect nodes import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud-node vars: tripleo_overcloud_node_action: introspect tripleo_overcloud_node_debug: true tripleo_overcloud_node_introspect_all_manageable: True tripleo_overcloud_node_introspect_provide: True - name: Overcloud deploy import_role: name: tripleo-overcloud vars: tripleo_overcloud_action: deploy tripleo_overcloud_debug: true tripleo_overcloud_deploy_environment_files: - /home/stack/params.yaml Thoughts? Thanks, -Alex [0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/tripleo-operator-ansible [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/699311/ [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/701628/ [3] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/701034/ [4] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/701628/

7 7

[infra] Retire openstack/js-openstack-lib repository
by Andreas Jaeger 09 Jan '20

09 Jan '20

The js-openstack-lib repository is orphaned and has not seen any real merges or contributions since February 2017, I propose to retire it. I'll send retirement changes using topic retire-js-openstack-lib, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj(a)suse.com Twitter: jaegerandi SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D 90409 Nürnberg (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) GF: Felix Imendörffer GPG fingerprint = EF18 1673 38C4 A372 86B1 E699 5294 24A3 FF91 2ACB

5 10

[largescale-sig] Meeting summary and next actions
by Thierry Carrez 09 Jan '20

09 Jan '20

Hi everyone, The Large Scale SIG held a meeting earlier today. You can access the summary and logs of the meeting at: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/large_scale_sig/2019/large_scale_si… This meeting was focused on immediate next steps on the two initial goals for the SIG. For the "Scaling within one cluster, and instrumentation of the bottlenecks" goal, after the holidays we will collect user stories of what happens (or what breaks first) as you scale up single clusters. We will also produce a first RFC draft for an oslo.metric blueprint, and learn more about the "Golden signals" concept. Standing TODOs: - all prepare a short description of what happens (what breaks first) when scaling up a single cluster - ttx to prepare etherpad and send ML thread asking for user scaling stories, to be posted after the end-of-year holidays - masahito to produce first draft for the oslo.metric blueprint - all learn more about golden signals concept as described in https://landing.google.com/sre/book.html For the "Document large scale configuration and tips &tricks" goal we will start collecting relevant articles and blogposts. We agreed that in order to properly document large scale configuration defaults, we should probably both patch existing docs and create new documentation. Standing TODOs: - all add links to relevant articles around large scale openstack (if you find any) to the etherpad - oneswig to follow up with Scientific community to find such articles - amorin to start a thread on documenting configuration defaults for large scale, introduce the "mixture of both" tactic The next meeting will happen on January 15, at 9:00 UTC on #openstack-meeting. Cheers, -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

3 4

[scientific][www] Unable to download OpenStack for Scientific Research book
by Pierre Riteau 09 Jan '20

09 Jan '20

Hello, I tried to download the book at https://www.openstack.org/science/ but the link doesn't work. Could this please be fixed? I looked on openstack.org for a contact address, but couldn't find one. Please let me know if there is a specific address I should use next time. Thanks, Pierre

2 2

[tripleo] Use Podman 1.6 in CI
by Luke Short 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

Hey folks, We have been running into a situation where an older version of Podman is used in CI that has consistent failures. It has problems deleting storage associated with a container. A possible workaround (originally created by Damien) can be found here [1]. A few of us been in talks with the Podman team about this problem and have tested with a newer version of it (1.6.4, to be exact) and found that it is no longer an issue. The most ideal situation is to simply use this newer version of Podman instead of adding hacky workarounds that we will soon revert. However, I am unsure about how we would go about doing this upstream. RHEL will soon get an updated Podman version but CentOS always lags behind. Even CentOS 8 Stream does not contain the newer version [2]. The question/ask I have is can we ship/use a newer version of Podman in our upstream CI? Or should we continue our efforts on making a workaround? 1. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/698999/ 2. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/ Sincerely, Luke Short

5 6

[Multi-Arch SIG] summary and actions from last meeting
by Rico Lin 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

Hi all Thanks to all who sign up and help to form Multi-Arch SIG We hosted our two initial meetings this week [1] and both successful. And for who cares about multi-arch (for example like ARM support in community), feel free to join our future meetings [2]. Here are some actions from this week's meetings: * Create StoryBoard for Multi-Arch SIG (ricolin) * Build multi-arch SIG repo (ricolin) * Collect update ppc64le actions and resources in community if see any (mrda) * Help with documentations once Multi-Arch SIG repo is ready (jeremyfreudberg) * Update governance-sigs to make a more clear description for Multi-Arch SIG (jeremyfreudberg) There are two docs. ideas `oh, on arm64 you need to do XYZ in other way - here is how and why` and `use cases, who, and issues they had`. Both of them seem like great docs. to start with. So that I assume will be something this SIG will try to work on as one of our first step goals. We need more people to help and more resource in CI as well. There's a lot of WIP resources and CI jobs in our community and all of them are collected in our etherpad [3] now. Feel free to update that etherpad and also sign you or your organization's name on it. Please join us:) Once we have our StoryBoard ready, we should be able to create tasks on it so everyone can create and track tasks like CI job, documentations, etc. last but not least, we are looking for people to nominate or volunteer for chair roles (which can be multiple). There are some really experienced community members been nominated and I will check with them if willing to take the role. On the other hand, I'm volunteering to apply for one of SIG chair seats and help to build this SIG, but happy to give it to others if we can have more people sign up for that role:) So let me know if you're interested. [1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/multi_arch/2020/ [2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Multi-Arch_SIG_Meeting [3] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Multi-arch -- May The Force of OpenStack Be With You, *Rico Lin*irc: ricolin

1 0

[cinder] ussuri virtual mid-cycle poll
by Brian Rosmaita 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

As determined at the virtual PTG (which seems like it happened only a few weeks ago), we'll be doing a two-phase virtual mid-cycle, meeting for two hours the week of 20 January (before the spec freeze) and again around the week of 16 March (the Cinder new feature status checkpoint). There's a poll up to determine a suitable time for the first virtual mid-cycle meeting: https://doodle.com/poll/n3tmq8ep43dyi7tv Please fill out the poll as soon as you can. If all the times are horrible for you, please suggest an alternative in a comment on the poll. The poll will close at 23:59 UTC on Saturday 11 January. (I know it's soon, but that way we'll have time to make adjustments if necessary.) cheers, brian

1 0

[all][infra] Compressed job log artifacts not loading in browser
by Clark Boylan 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

Over the holidays the infra team noticed that some of our release artifacts were in the wrong file format. On further investigation we discovered the reason for this was some swift implementations were inflating compressed tarballs when retrieved by clients not setting accept-encoding: gzip. We then ended up with tar files when we expected .tar.gz format files. This behavior seems to be controlled by the content-encoding we set on object upload. If we tell swift that the object is a gzip'd file on upload then the webservers helpfully inflate them when a client retrieves them. In order to fix our release artifacts we have updated our swift upload tooling to stop setting content-type on gzip files. This forces the swift implementation to return the files in the same format they are uploaded when retrieved. A side effect of this is that any gzip'd files (like testr_results.html.gz) are no longer automatically decompressed for you when you retrieve them. We have fixes up to handle common occurrences of this at https://review.opendev.org/#/c/701578/ and https://review.opendev.org/701282 (note the second case is already handled on OpenDev's Zuul). If you run into other files you expect to be browesable but get compressed instead, the fix is to stop compressing the files explicitly in the job. We will still upload files in compressed form to swift for efficiency but we should operate on these files as if they were uncompressed. Then for files that should be compressed (like .tar.gz files) we can pass them through as is avoiding any format change problems. Clark

2 1

[cliff][docs][requirements] new cliff versions causes docs to fail to build
by Matthew Thode 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

Looks like some things changed in the new version that we depended upon and are now causing failures. Exception occurred: File "/home/zuul/src/opendev.org/openstack/python-openstackclient/.tox/docs/lib/python3.6/site-packages/cliff/sphinxext.py", line 245, in _load_app if not issubclass(cliff_app_class, app.App): TypeError: issubclass() arg 1 must be a class -- Matthew Thode

4 6