- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[all][TC] Stats about rechecking patches without reason given
by Slawek Kaplonski 01 Jul '22

01 Jul '22

Hi, During the last PTG and after it, in the TC we were discussing about CI resources usage and about "rechecks" of the CI jobs (I know, it's again the same topic). One of the things we would like to limit, or even avoid is to do "no reason rechecks" which means writing quick comment "recheck" without checking what really was wrong in the previous run. We know that putting some hard rules that only comments with "recheck" with given reason will trigger new CI jobs run will not work fine as people may simply start writing any random things there. But we want to encourage all teams to at least to investigate failures and do as many rechecks with explanation as possible. For now I prepared simple script [1] which counts how much of all rechecks are "bare rechecks". It can be checked by project (like openstack/neutron) or give summary for all projects or teams (like Quality Assurance for example). I prepared some stats for all teams listed in the https://opendev.org/openstack/governance/src/branch/master/reference/projec… from last 30 days: +-------------------+---------------+--------------+-------------------+ | Team | Bare rechecks | All Rechecks | Bare rechecks [%] | +-------------------+---------------+--------------+-------------------+ | skyline | 20 | 20 | 100.0 | | magnum | 2 | 2 | 100.0 | | zun | 1 | 1 | 100.0 | | mistral | 9 | 9 | 100.0 | | ec2-api | 1 | 1 | 100.0 | | barbican | 15 | 15 | 100.0 | | venus | 2 | 2 | 100.0 | | solum | 1 | 1 | 100.0 | | tacker | 30 | 30 | 100.0 | | trove | 4 | 4 | 100.0 | | rally | 2 | 2 | 100.0 | | storlets | 5 | 5 | 100.0 | | winstackers | 3 | 3 | 100.0 | | OpenStack Charms | 32 | 33 | 96.97 | | sahara | 27 | 28 | 96.43 | | keystone | 24 | 25 | 96.0 | | kuryr | 120 | 126 | 95.24 | | kolla | 134 | 142 | 94.37 | | Puppet OpenStack | 94 | 103 | 91.26 | | cloudkitty | 10 | 11 | 90.91 | | OpenStack-Helm | 29 | 32 | 90.62 | | blazar | 8 | 9 | 88.89 | | tripleo | 563 | 646 | 87.15 | | requirements | 20 | 23 | 86.96 | | Telemetry | 30 | 35 | 85.71 | | horizon | 55 | 67 | 82.09 | | ironic | 131 | 164 | 79.88 | | oslo | 11 | 14 | 78.57 | | heat | 25 | 33 | 75.76 | | cinder | 221 | 294 | 75.17 | | cyborg | 6 | 8 | 75.0 | | murano | 3 | 4 | 75.0 | | glance | 20 | 27 | 74.07 | | OpenStackSDK | 47 | 64 | 73.44 | | manila | 108 | 160 | 67.5 | | neutron | 149 | 221 | 67.42 | | senlin | 2 | 3 | 66.67 | | swift | 16 | 25 | 64.0 | | Quality Assurance | 106 | 167 | 63.47 | | nova | 41 | 71 | 57.75 | | octavia | 32 | 60 | 53.33 | | designate | 19 | 39 | 48.72 | | OpenStackAnsible | 41 | 226 | 18.14 | +-------------------+---------------+--------------+-------------------+ As You can see from that list above, there is much to improve there. I hope that if teams will be checking more reasons of the CI failures, and reporting bugs found there, we may make our CI more stable and as a result have less rechecks which will save our infra resources :) [1] https://github.com/slawqo/rechecks-stats/blob/main/rechecks_stats/bare_rech… -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat -------- [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/governance/src/branch/master/reference/projec… [2] https://github.com/slawqo/rechecks-stats/blob/main/rechecks_stats/bare_rech…

8 10

[Openstack--Ansible] Playbook for Host Prep
by Dave Hall 30 Jun '22

30 Jun '22

Hello, I am wondering if there is any sort of playbook or script for setting up the networking on a new physical host prior to adding it to a cluster. It is a bit cumbersome to do it by hand, especially given that bridges on one type of host need an IP while the same bridge on another type of host should not have an IP. Seeding the /etc/hosts file would be nice as well. Going a bit further, it would be awfully nice if a given host could have the same 4th octet for all host interfaces, or at least for the important ones. I believe that since the 172.29 subnets are /22 this should be possible at least for smaller clusters. Thanks. -Dave -- Dave Hall Binghamton University kdhall(a)binghamton.edu

3 2

[sdk] renaming a volume with the SDK
by jdratlif＠globalnoc.iu.edu 30 Jun '22

30 Jun '22

I'm trying to set a property on a volume, specifically the name. But when I try to do this, it tells me the Session object has no default_microversion. I have all my auth in environment variables. Using TOKEN authentication. What am I doing wrong here? import openstack from openstack.block_storage.v3._proxy import Proxy as BlockStorageService from openstack.block_storage.v3.volume import Volume # enable openstack debug logging openstack.enable_logging(debug=True) conn = openstack.connect() cinder: BlockStorageService = conn.block_storage volume: Volume = cinder.get_volume("b3a70014-1cf0-4fd1-bdc4-183dbfd33e79") volume.name = "test_rename" volume.commit(conn.session) Thanks, --- John Ratliff Systems Automation Engineer GlobalNOC @ Indiana University

2 3

[neutron] Drivers meeting agenda - 01.07.2022.
by Lajos Katona 30 Jun '22

30 Jun '22

Hi Neutron Drivers, The agenda for tomorrow's drivers meeting is at [1]. * [RFE] Adding the "rekey" parameter to the api for strongswan like "dpd_action" (#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1979044) * [RFE] Firewall Group Ordering on Port Association (#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1979816) [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers#Agenda See you at the meeting tomorrow. Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)

1 0

[all][tc] Technical Committee next weekly meeting on 30 June 2022 at 1500 UTC
by Ghanshyam Mann 30 Jun '22

30 Jun '22

Hello Everyone, The technical Committee's next weekly meeting is scheduled for 30 June 2022, at 1500 UTC. If you would like to add topics for discussion, please add them to the below wiki page by Wednesday, 29 June at 2100 UTC. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting -gmann

1 1

[tc][policy][ptl][operator] OpenSatck RBAC goal is to focus on project personas first (postpone the 'scope' implementation)
by Ghanshyam Mann 30 Jun '22

30 Jun '22

Hello Everyone, We have received a good amount of feedback from the operator. In ops meetup Berlin as well as from KDDI (Japanese telco). I have summarized the feedback in etherpad[1]. From feedback, it is clear that 'scope' enable will break heat so do NFV operators and even other operators are also confused with the 'scope' concept. Most operators want legacy admin to work as it is (able to do everything in deployment). We discussed this feedback in the policy popup meeting[2] and based on feedback and our outstanding issue of 'scope enable break heat create_stack', we decided to postpone the `scope` implementation. That is the way forward to at least implement the project personas which is asked by many operators. Basically the below direction: * Finish delivering project personas This is to introduce the `member` and `reader` roles to operate things within their project. By default, any other project role like `foo` will not be allowed to do anything in the project. * Postpone the `scope` implementation for later Some standalone services like Ironic can still have the `scope` implementation as long as it does not break any cross-service communication. Other services will make sure they work for project scope personas even with enforce_scope enabled. We are not saying 'scope' things are not good or we will never do it but at the same time, I am not sure when we will do it in future. At least moving this giant goal to focus on the project personas first will help us to deliver one good feature (project personas) for operators otherwise we are stuck. Complete details about the reason to postpone the 'scope' implementation and projects persons detail are proposed in community-wide goal, please review there. - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/847418 [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/rbac-operator-feedback#L45 [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/rbac-zed-ptg#L171

4 5

Rocky? Stream?
by Ken D'Ambrosio 29 Jun '22

29 Jun '22

Hey, all. My company's looking for the path forward, after the switcheroo with CentOS, and we're wondering what seems to be solidly supported now and in the future. Any ideas? Thanks! -Ken

1 0

[PTG] [All] [Ops] [PTL] October 2022 Team Signup
by Kendall Nelson 29 Jun '22

29 Jun '22

Hi Everyone, At the Berlin Summit, we announced the next PTG will be held from Monday, October 17th to Thursday, October 20th, 2022 in Columbus, OH! To signup your team, you must complete the survey[1] by August 12th at 7:00 UTC. We NEED accurate contact information for the moderator of your team’s sessions. This is because the survey information will be used to organize the schedule signups which will be done via the PTGBot. If you are not on IRC, please get setup[2] on the OFTC network and join #openinfra-events. You are also encouraged to familiarize yourself with the PTGBot documentation[3] as well. If you have any questions, please reach out! Information about signing up for timeslots will be sent to moderators mid to late August. Registration will open soon! A discounted room block at the PTG venue will be available. Continue to visit openinfra.dev/ptg for updates. -Kendall (diablo_rojo) [1] Team Survey: https://openinfrafoundation.formstack.com/forms/oct2022_ptg_team_signup [2] Setup IRC: https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/common/irc.html [3] PTGBot README: https://opendev.org/openstack/ptgbot/src/branch/master/README.rst

1 0

Kolla Train deliverables are going EOL
by Radosław Piliszek 29 Jun '22

29 Jun '22

Dear Fellow OpenStackers, Kolla Train deliverables (Kolla, Kolla-Ansible, Kayobe) are going EOL. [1] Ussuri and Victoria remain in extended maintenance. Wallaby, Xena and Yoga are our current stable releases. The primary reason for EOLing is that the branch's CI is badly broken by Python2 and CentOS7 issues and there is no interest in fixing the issues. [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/848148 Kind regards, -yoctozepto

1 0

Glance folder to store images
by A Monster 29 Jun '22

29 Jun '22

I noticied in the glance configuration file after deploying openstack that filesystem_store_datadir=/var/lib/glance/images/ however, upon inspection, I found that images weren't stored in that folder, instead all images where located in this folder */var/lib/docker/volumes/glance/_data/images/.* So I'm thinking if actually filesystem_store_datadir is not used to store images but maybe something else.

3 2