January 2023 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

live resize
by Parsa Aminian 15 Mar '23

15 Mar '23

hello on openstack with ceph backend is it possible to live resize instances ? I want to change flavor without any down time .

5 6

[security-sig] Polls in preparation to revive our meetings
by Jeremy Stanley 01 Mar '23

01 Mar '23

As discussed at the last PTG, the present meeting time (15:00 UTC on the first Thursday of each month) is inconvenient for some attendees, and that combined with year-end holidays and general busy weeks recently have led to skipping them entirely. In order to start narrowing down the potential meeting schedule, I have two initial polls. The first is to determine what frequency we should meet. If you have an opinion on that, please fill out this poll before Thursday, February 9 (two weeks from today): https://framadate.org/wz7GioqmgyWeILkr The second poll is to hopefully determine what day of the week is optimal for potential attendees. If you have a preference for which day of the week to meet, please complete this one by the same date as the first: https://framadate.org/CyxKgZPT8PWxcCnJ Once I can analyze the results, I'll put together a more specific poll for choosing a time of day as well as possibly choosing which week(s) of the month (if we don't settle on weekly frequency). In the meantime, let's plan to hold February's meeting on Thursday the 2nd at 15:00-16:00 UTC as usual[*] for anyone who is able to attend, and I'll get an agenda together in preparation for that. [*] https://meetings.opendev.org/#OpenStack_Security_SIG_meeting -- Jeremy Stanley

1 1

[puppet] Retiring untested and unmaintained modules (murano, rally and tacker)
by Takashi Kajinami 26 Feb '23

26 Feb '23

Hello, In Puppet OpenStack projects we have multiple modules to support multiple OpenStack components. However unfortunately some of these have not been attracting enough interest from developers and have been unmaintained. During the past few cycles we retired a few incomplete modules but I'm wondering if we can retire a few unmaintained modules now, to reduce our maintenance/release effort. I checked the modules we have currently, and I think the following three can be first candidates. - puppet-murano - puppet-rally - puppet-tacker We haven't seen any feedback from users about these modules for a long time. Most of the changes for the past 2~3 years are proposed by me but I am not really using these components. These modules do not have proper test coverage and it's quite difficult for us to catch any breakage and honestly I'm not quite sure these modules can work properly with the latest code. Actually we've often caught up with the latest requirements several years after the change was made in the software side, and I'm afraid these are not well-maintained. eg. - support for tacker-conductor was added 4 years after the service was added - we didn't noticed that the openstack plugin was split out from the core rally package for several years If anybody has concerns with retiring these modules, then please let us know. If we don't hear any objections for a while, then I'll start proposing changes for project retirement. Thank you, Takashi -- ---------- Takashi Kajinami

4 9

[kolla-ansible] [yoga] [magnum] [k8s] cannot attach persistent volume to pod
by Stuart Whitman 24 Feb '23

24 Feb '23

Hello, When I try to attach a persistent cinder volume to a pod, I get FailedMount and FailedAttachVolume timeout events. I also get these errors in the log of the csi-cinder-controllerplugin-0 pod: E1020 13:38:41.747511 1 reflector.go:126] k8s.io/client-go/informers/factory.go:133: Failed to list *v1beta1.VolumeAttachment: the server could not find the requested resource E1020 13:38:41.748187 1 reflector.go:126] k8s.io/client-go/informers/factory.go:133: Failed to list *v1beta1.CSINode: the server could not find the requested resource I fixed a CrashLoopBackoff error with the csi-snapshotter container in the csi-cinder-controllerplugin-0 pod by providing the label "csi_snapshotter_tag=v4.0.0" when I created the cluster template. I found that suggestion in an issue on the GitHub cloud-provider-openstack project. I'm not finding any help with this error on Google. Thanks, -Stu _____________________________________ The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments from Group W may contain confidential and/or proprietary information and is intended only for the named recipient to whom it was originally addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, distribution, or copying of this e-mail or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately of that fact by return e-mail and permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments to it.

3 5

[Magnum]enable cluster user trust
by Nguyễn Hữu Khôi 15 Feb '23

15 Feb '23

Hello guys. I am going to use Magnum for production but I see that https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-7404 if I want to use cinder for k8s cluster. Is there any way to fix or minimize this problem? Thanks. Nguyen Huu Khoi

2 3

[heat][release] Proposing to EOL Train, Ussuri and Victoria
by Brendan Shephard 10 Feb '23

10 Feb '23

Hi folks, We’re looking to move Train, Ussuri and Victoria branches to EOL for Heat projects. Just reaching out to see if there are any objections, if I don’t hear anything back I’ll move forward with that this week. Cheers, Brendan Shephard Senior Software Engineer Red Hat Australia

2 3

[magnum] Other Distro for k8s
by Nguyễn Hữu Khôi 09 Feb '23

09 Feb '23

Hello guys. I know that Magnum is using Fedora Coreos for k8s. Why don't we use a long-term distro such as Ubuntu for this project? I will be more stable. and this project seems obsolete with the old version for k8s. Nguyen Huu Khoi

3 6

[charms] Team Delegation proposal
by Chris MacNaughton 08 Feb '23

08 Feb '23

Hello All, <tl;dr> I would like to propose some new ACLs in Gerrit for the openstack-charms project: - openstack-core-charms - ceph-charms - network-charms - stable-maintenance </tl;dr> With an increasing focus split among the openstack-charmers team, I'm observing that people are focused on more specific subsets of the charms, and would like to propose that new ACLs are created to allow us to recognize that officially. I've chosen the breakdown above as it aligns neatly with where the focus lines are at this point, letting developers work on their specific focus areas. This proposal would not reduce permissions for anybody who is currently a core on the openstack-charms project and, in fact, future subteam core members could aspire to full openstack-charmers core as well. Ideally, this approach will let us escalate developers to "core" developers for the subteam(s) where they have demonstrated the expertise we expect in a core-charmer. It also allows a more gradual escalation to being a core in the openstack-charms project, making it a progression rather than a single destination. As a related addition, I'm appending to this proposal the creation of a stable-maintenance ACL which would allow members to manage backports without a full core-charmer grant. --- Chris MacNaughton

5 7

[ALL] Why we dont have an official forum?
by Nguyễn Hữu Khôi 08 Feb '23

08 Feb '23

Hello guys. Openstack is a very interesting project, many questions from users will make it grow more and more but I see that people, including me, still ask the same question. It is hard to sort or find knowledge by this way. If we hope this project spreads for people, we need a new way to share knowledge and skills, we are in the modern world but the way to access and exchange information in this project is too obsolete. This is a wall to slow down this project. Nguyen Huu Khoi

13 19

[qa][gate][stable] stable/wallaby gate is broken
by Ghanshyam Mann 07 Feb '23

07 Feb '23

Hello Everyone, You might know stable/wallaby which is in the EM phase is broken because of the Tempest master incompatibility. As this is in EM phase, Tempest master does support it and the fix is to use the old compatible Tempest. I have pushed the fix on devstack to pin Tempest 29.0.0 to test stable/wallaby, do not recheck until that is merged: - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/871782 This depends on a few other fixes which are in the gate. Like the Tempest pin, we need to pin tempest plugins also on stable/wallaby. I have pushed a few projects fix for that, please review those if the devstack patch alone does not fix the gate - https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:wallaby-pin-tempest+status:open - https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bug%252F2003993 -gmann

2 4