Open Stack

On Mon, 2022-09-05 at 16:19 +0200, Előd Illés wrote:
> Hi,
> With the latest oslo.db 12.1.0 release it seems multiple repositories are
> broken (see the corresponding requirements patch [1] for details, and probably
> there are more, that are not tested within requirements repository). The patch
> that introduces the break [2] "is necessary for oslo.db and openstack
> applications in general to be able to run on SQLAlchemy 2.0" according to
> patch author.
> Since we are after the 3rd milestone of Zed, we have very limited time to
> figure out what to do. The 2 options are:
>
> 1) fix every broken repository to work with oslo.db 12.1.0
>      as far as we know this is quite impossible as for some repositories the
> already existing fixes took almost a cycle to be implemented and there are
> still undiscovered bugs around this. (we don't know if this is really true, or
> probably there are cases where it's easy to fix)

I don't think this is True. To fully prepare for SQLAlchemy 2.0 you would need
to do this work, yes, however the issue here is that oslo.db no longer
*defaults* to enabling one of the SQLAlchemy features that's being removed in
2.0, autocommit, and not that it no longer supports it. There's nothing to stop
the affected projects from manually enabling autocommit behavior and to prove
this I just put together a patch for aodh to do just that [1]. Manually enabling
this feature would be my preferred approach since it means we're kicking a
slightly smaller can down the road and we'll have a better understanding of the
projects that still need to do work for SQLAlchemy 2.0, but I don't know how
likely it is that we can land all of these in the next week.

> 2) revert the breaking change [2] and do another release in oslo.db now
> without it (and add it back after Zed release & release oslo.db with it as
> soon as possible in Antelope cycle)
>      as far as we understand this does not cause any issue for those who
> already adapted to oslo.db 12.1.0, so this should not be painful

This is all true, but it doesn't actually fix anything and delays the necessary
work to get us moving in the right direction. I've been harping on about the
fact that SQLAlchemy 2.0 is coming and will affect many projects for over a year
now [2] so perhaps a small but firm nudge like this would be beneficial and get
things rolling moving into Antelope?

> Based on the above Release team is opting toward the 2nd option.
> Please let us know your opinion!
> [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/855153/
>  [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.db/+/804775
> Thanks,
> 
>  Előd 

Cheers,
Stephen

[1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/aodh/+/855962
[2] https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-August/024122.html