April 2020 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[swift] Rolling upgrade, any version relationships?
by Mark Kirkwood 24 May '20

24 May '20

Hi, we are looking at upgrading our 2.7.0 Swift cluster. In the past I've modeled this on a dev system by upgrading storage nodes one by one (using 2.17 as the target version). This seemed to work well - I deliberately left the cluster half upgraded for an extended period to test for any cross version weirdness (didn't see any). However I'm wanting to check that I have not missed something important. So my questions are: - If upgrading from 2.7.0 is it safe to just grab the latest version (e.g 2.23)? - If not is there a preferred version to jump to first? - Is it ok for the upgrade to take extended time (e.g weeks) and therefore be running with some new and some old storage nodes for that time? regards Mark

3 5

[swift] Erasure code hardware offloading
by Mark Kirkwood 22 May '20

22 May '20

Hi, Can Swift make use of an Erasure Code offload card (e.g https://community.mellanox.com/s/article/understanding-erasure-coding-offlo… regards Mark

2 1

[tc][tricircle] Retiring the Tricircle project
by Ghanshyam Mann 18 May '20

18 May '20

Hello Everyone, As you know, Tricirlce is a leaderless project for the Victoria cycle means there is no PTL candidate for Victoria cycle. 'No PTL' is one of the criteria which triggers TC to start checking the health, maintainers of the project for dropping project from OpenStack Governance[1]. TC discussed the Tricircle project in today's meeting[2] and checked if the project has maintainers but no PTL or it is missing the maintainer completely. By looking at the Ussuri cycle development work, it seems no activity related to Tricircle except few gate fixes or community goal commits[2]. Based on all these checks, we are going to start the process of removing Tricircle from governance in the Victoria cycle as specified in the Mandatory Repository Retirement resolution [4] and detailed in the infra manual [5]. NOTE: release team is trying to do Ussuri release for Tricircle's deliverables if we can get this reno fix merge - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/721697/ >From the Victoria cycle, Tricircle will move out of OpenStack governance by keeping their repo under OpenStack namespace with an empty master branch with 'Not Maintained' message in README. If someone from old or new maintainers shows interest to continue its development then it can be re-added to OpenStack governance. With that thanks to all Tricircle contributors and PTLs for maintaining this project. [1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/dropping-projects.html [2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2020/tc.2020-04-21-15.01.log.html [3] https://www.stackalytics.com/?metric=commits&release=ussuri&module=tricircl… [4] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20190711-mandatory-reposito… [5] https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#retiring-… -gmann

1 1

[swift] Adding disks - one by one or all lightly weighted?
by Mark Kirkwood 14 May '20

14 May '20

Hi, We are wanting to increase the number of disks in each of our storage nodes - from 4 to 12. I'm wondering whether it is better to: 1/ Add 1st new disk (with a reduced weight)...increase the weight until full, then repeat for next disk etc 2/ Add 'em all with a (much i.e 1/8 of that in 1/ ) reduced weight...increase the weights until done Thoughts? regards Mark

2 2

[oslo][nova][vmware] Replacement for suds library
by Stephen Finucane 14 May '20

14 May '20

The suds-jurko library used by oslo.vmware is emitting the following warnings in nova tests. /nova/.tox/py36/lib/python3.6/site-packages/suds/resolver.py:89: DeprecationWarning: invalid escape sequence \% self.splitp = re.compile('({.+})*[^\%s]+' % ps[0]) /nova/.tox/py36/lib/python3.6/site-packages/suds/wsdl.py:619: DeprecationWarning: invalid escape sequence \s body.parts = re.split('[\s,]', parts) These warnings are going to be errors in Python 3.10 [1]. We have over 18 months before we need to worry about this [2], but I'd like to see some movement on this well before then. It seems the suds-jurko fork is dead [3] and movement on yet another fork, suds-community, is slow [4]. How difficult would it be to switch over to something that does seem maintained like zeep [5] and, assuming it's doable, is anyone from VMWare/SAP able to do this work? Stephen [1] https://docs.python.org/3.9/whatsnew/3.9.html#you-should-check-for-deprecat… [2] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0596/ [3] https://bitbucket.org/jurko/suds/src/default/ [4] https://github.com/suds-community/suds/pull/32 [5] https://python-zeep.readthedocs.io/en/master/

5 6

[Tempest][Restack]Call for help on 2020:06 Certificaion
by prakash RAMCHANDRAN 08 May '20

08 May '20

Hi all, Appreciate all your inputs in mail and one-on-one conversations I had with few of you. Like to set proper expectations before we deal with extending our goals. First we must deliver on continuity of Refstack, while we evaluate the value it adds to end users through survey. I. Every Release - There is a new criterion for Certification - Do we have one for 2020.06? - Who has volunteered or would like to volunteer for this effort? II. Can we have previous WG Chair or anyone can brief us (by call or by email ) as what the process was and how it was managed. |||. Who were last release OSF Reviewers? Can they volunteer for 2020:06 release definition for Refstack - https://opendev.org/openstack/refstack/ VI. Given the circumstances (CoViD-19) will it be possible to deliver Refstack in June /July 2020? (Need some estimates from TC or others who managed this in past years) V. Is Zun - ?, Magnum -? Are both OCI and/or CNI compliant? - Can they be tested using Tempest and add those two or any other container projects to refstack core? For Survey (suggest any specifics Questions to ask- may be few questions to - Customer / Vendors/ new feedback Q1-Value of Certification , Q2. How Often customers ask for it in RFP or sales cycle?, Q3. What additional Tests, process, frequency etc will add value for them?Q4. Do you think we should continue the efforts of Refstack?) Let me know through email and have added this to TC meeting for Thursday April 2.https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting ThanksPrakash Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

2 1

[keystone] Core group changes
by Colleen Murphy 07 May '20

07 May '20

Hi team, I'm very pleased to say that Vishakha Agarwal has joined the python-keystoneclient core team! Vishakha has gained a lot of knowledge of the clients in the last few months and this change will help empower her to continue to drive our goals of ensuring all of the clients fully support keystone's APIs. Thanks for taking this on, Vishakha! I also must announce that I've removed Dave Chen from the core list. Dave's responsibilities at his company have not been related to keystone for some time, and although we've been very grateful for the occasional review he gives from time to time, he's let me know he believes it's time to be formally removed. As with every core removal, if life brings him back to keystone we'll gladly welcome him back to the core team. Thanks, Dave, for all your hard work on keystone! Colleen

4 3

[Syntribos] Does anyone still use this?
by Gage Hugo 07 May '20

07 May '20

The Security SIG has recently been looking into updating several sites/documentation and one part we discussed the last couple meetings was the security tools listings[0]. One of the projects listed there, Syntribos, doesn't appear to have much activity[1] outside of zuul/python/docs maintenance and the idea of retiring the project was mentioned. However, there does seem to be an occasional bug-fix submitted, so we are sending this email out to see if anyone is still utilizing Syntribos. If so, please either respond here, reach out to us in the #openstack-security irc channel, or fill out the section in the Security SIG Agenda etherpad[2]. Thanks! [0] https://security.openstack.org/#security-tool-development [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/syntribos [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/security-agenda

2 2

[infra][qa][sigs][tc] Forming a Testing and Collaboration Tools (TaCT) SIG
by Jeremy Stanley 07 May '20

07 May '20

The Infrastructure team, and the CI team before it, has traditionally existed to care for the continuous integration and collaboration infrastructure on which the OpenStack community relies. With the rise of the OpenDev Collaboratory as a distinct effort outside of (but still primarily in service of) OpenStack, the majority of the team's former systems administration activities are no longer occurring under the authority of OpenStack. Most of the software and configuration management repositories previously in the care of the Infra team are also no longer official OpenStack deliverables, and have become part of OpenDev as well (and their biggest development effort, Zuul+Nodepool, was already spun out as an independent Open Infrastructure Project last year). With the above responsibilities moved elsewhere, the existence of a formal team is less of a necessity. What remains is a need to support OpenStack's project-specific testing and collaboration tooling and services, primarily job configuration and other things which shouldn't currently be generalized into components of the OpenDev Collaboratory. To this end, I propose the creation of a new Testing and Collaboration Tools (TaCT) SIG which would serve the role currently occupied by the OpenStack Infrastructure team. I'm open to alternative names, but employing the vague term "infrastructure" has perpetually confused newcomers to our community, so this seems like an opportunity for something less overloaded. The TaCT SIG would consist of the usual suspects: people who review OpenStack job configuration changes, people who dig into problems with test frameworks to unblock the integrated gate queue, people who figure out strange Python packaging related issues, people who help work out lapsed control of Launchpad admin groups... also, ideally, the person selected by the TC to serve as OpenStack's representative on the OpenDev Advisory Council would be heavily involved. Many of these activities are closely related to work the Quality Assurance team is doing, so hopefully folks who are active in QA will also participate in this SIG. What do you think? Does this satisfactorily capture the infrastructure needs of the OpenStack community, and could it serve as an alternative to the current Infrastructure team? -- Jeremy Stanley

5 7

[ironic] II SPUC - The Sanity Preservation Un-Conference
by Iury Gregory 07 May '20

07 May '20

Hello everyone \o/ We are going for the second edition of SPUC! For those who doesn't know what is SPUC check [0]. There is only 3 things you need to do: 1) Fill out the doodle in [1] *, it has options for the next two weeks since May 1st is a holiday. 2) Brainstorm some ideas of things you might want to talk about/present or LEARN! * 3) Dust off your silly hats! * * From Julia's email =) [0] Thank you! [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-March/013521.ht… [1] https://doodle.com/poll/2q5zmv3g6uy2475e -- *Att[]'sIury Gregory Melo Ferreira * *MSc in Computer Science at UFCG* *Software Engineer at Red Hat Czech* *Social*: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iurygregory *E-mail: iurygregory(a)gmail.com <iurygregory(a)gmail.com>*

3 3