- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[taskflow] Taskflow hangs with graph_flow with 50 tasks
by Alfredo Moralejo Alonso 28 Jan '26

28 Jan '26

Hi, In the watcher project, taskflow is used to execute actionplans which are composed of actions (taskflow tasks) with certain dependencies between them. We have found that taskflow has problems when actionplans start having problems when having parallelization >=2 around 35 actions and with 50 actions can take up to 45 minutes to find the next task after the first is done. Is anyone having this kind of scalability issues with taskflow? I've reported the issue in https://bugs.launchpad.net/taskflow/+bug/2139228 and provided a minimal reproducer with only taskflow. Any help or recommendation about a different way to implement it is appreciated. Alfredo

2 1

[cinder][nova][os-brick] Guidance on cross-project driver contribution
by Alokedip Choudhuri 28 Jan '26

28 Jan '26

Hello Everyone, We are working on contributing a new Cinder driver for Infoscale. This implementation requires coordinated changes across three projects to support the full attachment lifecycle: * Cinder: The core driver implementation. * Os-brick: The connector APIs will be implemented there * Nova: New driver implementation to support the required operations like, "attach, detach, extend" for the volumes provisioned through the InfoScale Backend. We have already registered blueprints for this work: * Cinder Blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/infoscale-cinder-driver * Nova Blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/infoscale-nova-driver Since this is a cross-project effort, I would appreciate guidance on the preferred workflow for submitting patches across multiple repositories to ensure a smooth integration. Looking forward to your feedback and suggestions. Thanks & Regards Alokedip Choudhuri

1 0

[openstack][octavia]Resize a Load Balancer
by Nguyễn Hữu Khôi 27 Jan '26

27 Jan '26

Hello. I see that patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/890215 Could I ask why we cannot merge it? Nguyen Huu Khoi

3 6

[tc][freezer][watcher][requirements][release][oslo][ironic] Please update your DPL liaisons
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 27 Jan '26

27 Jan '26

Hello project maintainers, To ensure project liaisons remain active and interested in their roles within the distributed leadership (DPL) model [1], the Technical Committee (TC) has created several reviews [2]. Project teams have until February 4, 2026, to oppose these changes and retain the DPL model for the 2026.2 "Hibiscus" release. After this deadline, we will seek Project Team Lead (PTL) nominations for these teams as part of the 2026.2 PTL elections [2]. Thanks, On behalf of the OpenStack TC, Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr) [1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/distributed-project-leadershi… [2] https://review.opendev.org/q/hashtag:%22dpl-reset%22+status:open [3] https://governance.openstack.org/election/

1 0

[tc] [all] [security] Attestation service for confidential VMs: any existing project?
by Jean-Philippe Jung 27 Jan '26

27 Jan '26

Hi, As the work progresses for the support of confidential VMs on OpenStack (support for AMD SEV-SNP, Intel TDX, Arm CCA), is there any current effort/project to look at the key missing piece for Confidential Computing: Attestation. Attestation provides cryptographic proof that your code is actually running inside a genuine Trusted Execution Environment (TEE), not just someone claiming it is. Without attestation, confidential computing is meaningless—you'd be trusting the cloud provider's word that your data is protected, which defeats the entire purpose. Attestation generates a signed report from the hardware itself, containing measurements of the code, the TEE's identity, and proof the CPU is legitimate. This lets you verify before sending sensitive data that: the hardware is real, the enclave code hasn't been tampered with, and the environment matches your expectations. It's trust anchored in silicon, not promises. The Attestation service would have connections to at least to compute and storage, as the attestation service would be the final approver to release a VM decryption key after verifying that the hardware stack is unmodified and suitable to run an encrypted VM. Thank you, JP Jung

5 8

[ops][publiccloud-sig] Public Cloud SIG meeting d.d. 28 January
by Kees Meijs | Nefos 27 Jan '26

27 Jan '26

Hello Stackers, Tomorrow (that's 28 January) the bi-weekly Public Cloud SIG meeting will be held again. The publicly available video meeting will be conducted from 08:05 hrs UTC (09:05 hrs CET) until 08:55 hrs UTC (09:55 hrs CET) here: https://meetpad.opendev.org/publiccloud-sig Additional information to be found on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PublicCloudSIG See you tomorrow! Cheers, Kees __ Kees Meijs BICT Nefos Cloud & IT <https://nefos.com/contact> Nefos IT bv Burgemeester Mollaan 34a 5582 CK Waalre - NL kvk 66494931 +31 (0)88 2088 188 <tel:+31882088188> nefos.com <https://nefos.com/contact> The information contained in this message is intended for the addressee only and may contain classified information. If you are not the addressee, please delete this message and notify the sender; you should not copy or distribute this message or disclose its contents to anyone. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual(s) and not necessarily of the organization. No reliance may be placed on this message without written confirmation from an authorised representative of its contents. No guarantee is implied that this message or any attachment is virus free or has not been intercepted and amended. General terms and conditions ("The NLdigital Terms") apply to all our products and services.

1 0

[tc][all] OpenStack Technical Committee Weekly Summary and Meeting Agenda (2026.1/R-9)
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 26 Jan '26

26 Jan '26

Hello Stackers, We're 9 weeks away from the date of the coordinated release of OpenStack 2026.1 "Gazpacho" [1]. In the past week, election officials set the dates for the combined election for Project Team Leads and for five seats on the OpenStack Technical Committee [2]. The nomination period begins at 23:45 UTC on February 04, 2026, and runs until 23:45 UTC on February 18, 2026. This may overlap with holiday periods around the world, so please feel free to submit your nominations early [3], and if you'd like, you could have someone else shepherd the nomination through in your absence. Official election updates will follow in a separate thread. Besides this, in the past week, the OpenStack-Ansible project team revived the os_watcher and os_freezer Ansible roles. There are several other governance updates that are undergoing the community's review. === Weekly Meeting === The TC hosted a weekly IRC meeting on January 20, 2026 [4]. We spent a significant amount of time discussing the future of our recommended web server stack, specifically regarding the eventual replacement of uWSGI. While uWSGI remains functional, its "maintenance mode" status and lack of HTTP/2 support are becoming bottlenecks for deployments. We discussed alternatives like Gunicorn and the Rust-based Granian, though the TC's primary goal here isn't to mandate a specific tool, but to clarify the distinction between CI convenience (DevStack-based testing) and production recommendations. Our high-level objective is to ensure that OpenStack services remain backend-agnostic (WSGI/ASGI compatible) while providing deployers with clear, updated documentation that reflects modern performance standards rather than legacy defaults. We also discussed adding a new community goal focused on supporting MariaDB/MySQL character set changes required by newer LTS releases of MariaDB. Doing this would drive consistency across services in maintaining database compatibility and stability. The next meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee is today, January 27, 2026, at 1700 UTC. It will be hosted on the #openstack-tc IRC channel on OFTC. Please find the agenda on the meeting's wiki page [5]. I hope you'll be able to join us there. === Governance Proposals === ==== Merged ==== - Revive os_freezer role for OSA | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/973364 - Revive os_watcher role for OSA | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/973385 - Replace obsolete PCRE packages | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/974074 ==== Open For Review ==== - Remove rbd-iscsi-client from release management | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/972316 - Move FIPS Compliance goal back to proposed | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/969145 - Update mission statement for kolla project | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/974421 - Remove barbican-ui from release management | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/972315 === Upcoming Events === - 2026-01-27: OpenInfra Board Meeting: https://board.openinfra.org/ - 2026-01-31: FOSDEM 2026: https://www.meetup.com/brussels-openinfra-meetup-group/events/312867974 - 2026-02-26: 2026.1 "Gazpacho" Feature Freeze / Milestone 3 === How to Contact the TC === You can reach the TC in several ways: 1. Email: send an email with the tag [tc] on this mailing list. 2. Ping us using the 'tc-members' keyword on the #openstack-tc IRC channel on OFTC. 3. Join us at our weekly meeting: The Technical Committee meets every Tuesday at 1700 UTC, except the third Tuesday of the month, when we meet at 0800 UTC [5]. Thank you very much for reading! On behalf of the OpenStack TC, Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr) OpenStack TC Chair [1] 2026.1 "Gazpacho" Release Schedule: https://releases.openstack.org/gazpacho/schedule.html [2] 2026.2 OpenStack Elections: https://governance.openstack.org/election/ [3] How to submit a candidacy: https://governance.openstack.org/election/#how-to-submit-a-candidacy [4] TC Meeting IRC Log, Jan 20 2026: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-01-20-08.00.html [5] TC Meeting Agenda, Jan 27 2026: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting

1 0

Joining the Openinfra/Openstack community
by Hamed Enayatzare 26 Jan '26

26 Jan '26

Hi everyone, I’ve been working with OpenStack for several years, mostly around deployment and operations. I recently decided to get more involved with the community and start participating here. Looking forward to learning, sharing experiences, and contributing where I can. ‌Best Regads Hamed Enayatzare

3 3

[Neutron] Bug deputy report Jan 19-26
by Jakub Libosvar 26 Jan '26

26 Jan '26

Hi all, I was the bug deputy for the last week. There are two undecided bugs, one proactive from the Nova team and one that might already be solved in master, would be good to discuss at the next team meeting. Here is the full report: Medium ------ * Ensure no RPC clients are instantiated if ``rpc_workers=0`` https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2139063 * [OVN] ``LogicalRouterPortEvent`` should discard routers not handled by Neutron API https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2139067 Rodolfo already proposed a patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/974709 Low --- * Remove neutron-ovn-db-sync-util and OVNDbMonitor functional tests using various connection types https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2139064 Slawek already proposed a patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/974691 Undecided --------- * Broken connectivity to external gateways for baremetal nodes https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2138941 This one is actually fixed in master and we can discuss if it can be closed. * Live migration or any host update operation may require resetting NVRAM https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2139077 This is a proactive report and it’s still not clear if there is any need from Neutron.

1 0

[nova] Ephemeral storage potential features
by Karol Klimaszewski 26 Jan '26

26 Jan '26

Hello, In my company (CloudFerro) we have developed two features related to nova ephemeral storage (with libvirt virt driver) - "SPDK-based ephemeral storage backend" and "Multiple ephemeral storage backend handling" (both described below). Would these features be appropriate to be added to upstream? If yes, then should I start with creating a blueprint and proposing a spec for each of them so it is more clear what we want to introduce? Of course not both at once, since there is some code that makes one work with the other. For us it would probably be best if we upstreamed "SPDK-based ephemeral storage backend" first and then upstreamed "Multiple ephemeral storage backend handling" Description of SPDK-based ephemeral storage backend: We add a new possible value for [libvirt]/images_type in nova.conf: spdk_lvol. If this value is set then local disks of instances are handled as logical volumes (lvols). of locally run SPDK instance (on the same compute as VM). See https://spdk.io/doc/logical_volumes.html#lvol for docs on this subject. These are essentially a part of local NVMe disk managed by SPDK. We create and manage those lvols by making calls from nova-compute to SPDK instance with RPC (https://spdk.io/doc/jsonrpc.html) using provided python library (https://github.com/spdk/spdk/blob/master/python/README.md) We attach those lvols to instances by exposing them as vhost-blk devices (see https://spdk.io/doc/vhost.html) and specifying them as disks with source_type='vhostuser'. This method of exposing NVMe local storage allows for much better I/O performance than exposing them from local filesystem. We currently have working: creating, deleting, cold-migrating, shelving, snapshots, unshelving VMs with this storage backend. We don't have live migration working yet but have it in plans. This feature includes changes only to nova. Description of Multiple ephemeral storage backend handling: We add a new configuration option [libvirt]/supported_image_types to nova.conf of nova-compute and change the meaning of [libvirt]/images_type to mean default image type. If libvirt:image_type extra_spec is specified in flavor then VM is scheduled on compute with appropriate image type in its [libvirt]/supported_image_types. We use potentially multiple DISK_GB resource providers and construct appropriate request groups to handle this scheduling. This spec is also used to fill driver_info.libvirt.image_type field of BDMs with destination_type=local of this VM. (driver_info is new JSON serialized field of BDM) Then in compute if BDM specifies this field we use its value instead of [libvirt]/images_type to decide on imagebackend to use for it. This method of handling multiple backends only works after being enabled by administrators by setting libvirt:image_type on all their flavors and running nova-manage commands that update existing VMs. Without enabling everything works as it was before. This feature includes changes to nova and some new traits in os-traits (One per possible value of [libvirt]/images_type + one extra) Best regards, Karol Klimaszewski

2 7