May 2020 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[cinder] PTG schedule
by Brian Rosmaita 30 May '20

30 May '20

The Cinder team will be meeting in the zoom Diablo room, Tuesday-Friday 1300-1600 UTC. Make sure you register for the PTG so you will receive the passwords to the video meeting: https://virtualptgjune2020.eventbrite.com/ The complete schedule for the PTG is here: https://www.openstack.org/ptg#tab_schedule Although Cinder won't be meeting on Monday, there are plenty of interesting sessions you can attend. See this helpful email for general PTG info: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-May/015054.html The official Cinder etherpad for the PTG is: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/victoria-ptg-cinder It contains the schedule. Please look it over so you can see when you'll be leading a discussion. Feel free to enhance any topic with additional information or questions. The schedule is organized like this: Tuesday - Current Cinder Issues Wednesday - Third Party Drivers Thursday - Cinder Improvements Friday - Cross-Project and Cinder Project Business see you next week! brian

1 0

[oslo] PTG Plans
by Ben Nemec 30 May '20

30 May '20

Hi, Sorry for the late notice on this. Many firedrills this week. I've made some updates to the etherpad[0] to reflect more concrete plans for both location and timing of topics. It worked out to just give everything 15 minutes for the first hour, and I reserved the second hour for cross-project discussions with Nova. As always, we can be flexible with the scheduling if something needs more or less discussion. The only timing constraint I saw mentioned was that Thierry needed the oslo.metrics topic to be early, so he gets to go first. :-) I also added a meetpad URL there. We used Jitsi pretty successfully for our previous virtual PTG so I don't see any reason to move off the open platform. I suggest trying to join ahead of time to make sure everything works for you. We do have a Zoom reserved for that time as well in case something catastrophic happens. If you have any concerns about the plan, let me know ASAP. Otherwise I'll see you all on Monday! -Ben 0: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/oslo-victoria-topics

1 0

Re: [all][dev][qa] cirros 0.5.1
by Radosław Piliszek 29 May '20

29 May '20

Hello OpenStack Folks! Since it's early in the Victoria cycle, it's a good time to revisit the cirros 0.5.1 migration in common CI. The patch [1] is getting a cleanup due to nova fix increasing instance memory limits upfront but I propose to merge it as soon as we clean it up properly. It has been tested with Ussuri in Kolla CI and had positive results from Tempest jobs for Neutron and Ironic. It would be great if we made sure projects no longer use the old cirros 0.4.0 nor some old Ubuntus. [1] https://review.opendev.org/711492 -yoctozepto

1 1

[TripleO][rdo][train][centos7] fails at ovn_south_db_server: Start containers for step 4 using paunch
by Ruslanas Gžibovskis 29 May '20

29 May '20

Hi all, I am running this deployment described here [1]. I am getting error on: Start containers for step 4 using paunch Error in link bellow [2] Running podman containers [3] links: 1 - https://github.com/qw3r3wq/homelab/tree/master/overcloud 2 - https://pastebin.com/HTUbz7Ry 3 - https://pastebin.com/1ApfiEyE -- Ruslanas Gžibovskis +370 6030 7030

3 5

[puppet] Puppet 5 is officially unsupported in Victoria release
by Tobias Urdin 29 May '20

29 May '20

Hello, Just a heads up that we've had a warning in the Ussuri release about it being the last release where we are going to support Puppet 5. This patch [1] was now submitted to remove this warning and officially state that Puppet 5 is unsupported from the Victoria release. [1] https://review.opendev.org/726310?

4 20

[tripleo] better observability into containers management in the post-paunch world
by Bogdan Dobrelya 29 May '20

29 May '20

Hello, as you may know, Paunch [0] was originally developed for simple containers management in TripleO. Today we have Paunch deprecated for the preference of ansible module [1]. It uses ansible async executions and performs management actions in batches. While that's great and novel and works faster, Paunch's logs were simple to follow and its code was easy to debug with pdb breakpoints. Howewer, debugging experience and overall observability (please excuse me that buzzword) has changed [2], when switched it to ansible. In order improve that situation, I propose that data aggregator [3] for post-processing of the containers data under the module's management. It is based on setting facts, using already developed custom filters [4], and ansible's set_stats [5]. That data is just a (big) dictionary that contains: * input containers configs fetched from json files for all deploy steps, * snapshotted runtime info as it was consumed by the containers management tasks, * internal processing results (identified logical state, like 'changed' or 'broken') That is for all of the batches of managed containers in a deployment, per hosts basis. And that's basically it. How to use that data is out of scope at this point of discussion. Please share your thoughts on the topic. Note that the aggregator itiself is simple (~140 LOC). Please don't call it over-engineered :) It *only* allows users and tripleo devs to build whatever complex and over-engineered data analysing pipelines on top of it. Those may be colored graphs of dependencies and states, or simple json parsing, like that prototype [5] (WIP, only for a standalone deployments). Wrapping it up, it's up to devs and users how to use that data aggregator. Let's just simplify their lives with debugging containers management framework please. [0] https://opendev.org/openstack/paunch [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-ansible/src/branch/master/tripleo_ans… [2] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1879455 [3] https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:bug/1879455 [4] https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-ansible/src/branch/master/tripleo_ans… [5] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/modules/set_stats_module.html -- Best regards, Bogdan Dobrelya, Irc #bogdando

1 0

[tripleo] Deprecating tripleo-heat-templates firstboot
by Steve Baker 29 May '20

29 May '20

Soon nova will be switched off by default on the undercloud and all overcloud deployments will effectively be deployed-server based (either provisioned manually or via the baremetal provision command) This means that the docs for running firstboot scripts[1] will no longer work, and neither will our collection of firstboot scripts[2]. In this email I'm going to propose what we could do about this situation and if there are still unresolved issues by the PTG it might be worth having a short session on it. The baremetal provisioning implementation already uses cloud-init cloud-config internally for user creation and key injection[3] so I'm going to propose an enhancement the the baremetal provisioning yaml format so that custom cloud-config instructions can be included either inline or as a file path. I think it is worth going through each firstboot script[2] and deciding what its fate should be (other than being deprecated in Ussuri): https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/firs… This has no parameters, so it could be converted to a standalone cloud-config file, but should it? Can this be achieved with kernel args? Does it require a reboot anyway, and so can be done with extraconfig? https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/firs… I'm not sure why this is implemented as first boot, it seems to consume the parameter |NetConfigDataLookup and transforms it to the format os-net-config needs for the file ||/etc/os-net-config/mapping.yaml. It looks like this functionality should be moved to where os-net-config is actually invoked, and the |||NetConfigDataLookup parameter should be officially supported. || | | |https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/firstboot/userdata_dev_rsync.yaml| |I suggest deleting this and including a cloud-config version in the baremetal provisioning docs.| |||| |https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/firstboot/userdata_heat_admin.yaml| |Delete this, there is already an abstraction for this built into the baremetal provisioning format[4]| | | |https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/firstboot/userdata_root_password.yaml| |Delete this and include it as an example in the baremetal provisioning docs.| | | |https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/firstboot/userdata_timesync.yaml| |Maybe this could be converted to an extraconfig/all_nodes script[5], but it would be better if this sort of thing could be implemented as an ansible role or playbook, are there any plans for an extraconfig mechanism which uses plain ansible semantics?| | | |cheers | [1] https://docs.openstack.org/project-deploy-guide/tripleo-docs/latest/feature… [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/firs… [3] https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-ansible/src/branch/master/tripleo_ans… [4] https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-ansible/src/branch/master/tripleo_ans… https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-ansible/src/branch/master/tripleo_ans… [5] https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/src/branch/master/extr…

3 5

[tripleo] PTG next week
by Wesley Hayutin 29 May '20

29 May '20

Greetings, PTG is next week. Please update the schedule if you have posted a topic Please register if you have not yet.. https://virtualptgjune2020.eventbrite.com/ All the information you should need should be posted on the following link. https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tripleo-ptg-victoria See ya next week :)

1 0

[tc] Monthly meeting
by Mohammed Naser 29 May '20

29 May '20

Hi everyone, Our monthly TC meeting is scheduled for next Thursday, June 4, at 1400 UTC. If you would like to add topics for discussion, please go to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting and fill out your suggestions by Wednesday, June 3, at 1900 UTC. Thank you. -- Mohammed Naser VEXXHOST, Inc.

1 0

[tripleo] Deprecating Paunch in Ussuri
by Emilien Macchi 29 May '20

29 May '20

Hi folks, In Ussuri we manage to successfully replace Paunch by Ansible (role + modules) to manage the container lifecycle in TripleO. As a reminder, this effort was part of the Simplification work that is being done in TripleO to reduce our number of tools and align it with our deployment framework based on Ansible. https://docs.openstack.org/tripleo-ansible/latest/roles/role-tripleo_contai… Paunch has been turned off for some time now and isn't tested anymore in upstream CI (master only). I would like to propose its deprecation in Ussuri and a removal in Victoria (or later if any valid pushback). https://review.opendev.org/#/c/720598/ Thanks, -- Emilien Macchi

2 3