On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:00 AM, Chris Friesen
chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
I just noticed that in Grizzly regardless of the number of vCPUs the value
of /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/libvirt/qemu/instance-X/cpu.shares seems to be the
same. If we were overloaded, this would give all instances the
On 26/08/13 15:34 -0500, Anne Gentle wrote:
Hi Kurt,
There's a thread that John Griffith started about 3rd party storage drivers,
where the code lives, how to review, how to ensure quality and maintenance, see
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-July/012557.html.
It won't
On 25/07/13 18:44 -0600, John Griffith wrote:
Hey Everyone,
Something I've been kicking around for quite a while now but never really been
able to get around to is the idea of requiring that drivers in Cinder run a
qualification test and submit results prior to introduction in to Cinder.
-Original Message-
From: Wang, Shane [mailto:shane.w...@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:31 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Requesting feedback on review 35759
Hi,
We submitted the patches for bp
On Mon, Aug 26 2013, Maxime Vidori wrote:
Currently, the charts for Horizon are directly created with D3. Maybe if we
add a js library on top of d3 it will be easier and development will be
faster. A blueprint was created at
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-chart.js We
Jay,
I should probably share to you about our work around DB.
Migrations should be run only in production and only for production
backends (e.g. psql and mysql)
In tests we should use Schemas created by Models
(BASE.metadata.create_all())
We are not able to use in this approach in moment
-Original Message-
From: Wang, Shane [mailto:shane.w...@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:51 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Requesting feedback on review 35759
Thank you, Gary, a little bit frustration but still have
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 04:57:31PM +0100, Steven Hardy wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to propose that we add Liang Chen to the heat-core team[1]
Liang has been doing some great work recently, consistently providing good
review feedback[2][3], and also sending us some nice patches[4][5],
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 05:42:00PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
Greetings,
Some OpenStack programs have started a nice trend of getting together in
the middle of the development cycle. These meetups can serve a number
of useful purposes: community building, ramping up new contributors,
Matt,
From the bug description:
Affects Version/s:1.2.0, 2.0.3-alpha
Target Version/s: 3.0.0, 2.3.0
So, it seems that Hadoop folks don't intend to include this patch into Hadoop
1.x
Ruslan
On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Matthew Farrellee wrote:
Howdy Ivan,
FYI,
Oh good catch. That's some poor UX.
We should find out why it isn't targeted for a 1.x release.
Best,
matt
On 08/27/2013 06:48 AM, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:
Matt,
From the bug description:
Affects Version/s:1.2.0, 2.0.3-alpha
Target Version/s: 3.0.0, 2.3.0
So, it seems that Hadoop folks
Hi,
The current infrastructure provided in Quantum [Grizzly], while building
Quantum API resource URL using the base function 'base.create_resource()' and
RESOURCE_ATTRIBUTE_MAP/SUB_RESOURCE_ATTRIBUTE_MAP, supports only two level URI.
Example:
GET /lb/pools/pool_id/members/member_id
Some
I have prepared the testing implementation of Rickshaw wrapped into a
general linechart and connected it to Ceilometer here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/35590/
(rendering is mostly copied from examples with some parts from Maxime
Vidori)
Rickshaw really works like a charm. I think it
First 'be like nova-network' is a merit for some deployments.
second, To allow admin to decide which network will be multihosted at
runtime will enable the neutron to continue using the current network node
(dhcp agent) mode at the same time.
If we force the network multihosted when the
On Aug 26, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Edgar Magana emag...@plumgrid.com wrote:
Hi Developers,
Let me explain my point of view on this topic and please share your thoughts
in order to merge this new feature ASAP.
My understanding is that multi-host is nova-network HA and we are
implementing
On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Yongsheng Gong gong...@unitedstack.com wrote:
First 'be like nova-network' is a merit for some deployments.
I'm afraid 'merit' is a bit vague for me. Would you please elaborate?
second, To allow admin to decide which network will be multihosted at runtime
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Is openstack looking to have a strong presence at FOSDEM 2014 ? I didn't
make it to FOSDEM this year, but IIUC, there were quite a few openstack
contributors talks in 2013.
Yes, we are aiming for a devroom again at FOSDEM this year.
IOW, should we consider holding
Today in the Project release status meeting, we are one week away from
FeatureFreeze. We'll review the remaining blueprints before the final rush.
Feel free to add extra topics to the agenda:
[1] http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting
All Technical Leads for integrated programs
On 08/26/2013 08:15 PM, Tim Smith wrote:
Hi all,
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Bob Ball bob.b...@citrix.com
mailto:bob.b...@citrix.com wrote:
I agree with the below from a XenServer perspective. As with
vmware, XenServer supports live snapshotting and creating multiple
On 08/27/2013 10:06 AM, Alessandro Pilotti wrote:
We are also planning to implement the live snapshot feature in the
Hyper-V driver during the next release cycle.
I'm personally in favour of publishing the APIs in Havana, as this would
provide a stable baseline at the beginning of the
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I tend to focus the bulk of my review activity on the libvirt driver,
since that's where most of my knowledge is. I've recently done some
reviews outside this area to help reduce our backlog, but I'm not
so comfortable approving stuff in many
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:55:03AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I tend to focus the bulk of my review activity on the libvirt driver,
since that's where most of my knowledge is. I've recently done some
reviews outside this area to help
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:06 AM, Alessandro Pilotti wrote:
We are also planning to implement the live snapshot feature in the
Hyper-V driver during the next release cycle.
I'm personally in favour of publishing the APIs in
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.comwrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:55:03AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I tend to focus the bulk of my review activity on the libvirt driver,
since that's where most
On 08/27/2013 10:53 AM, Alessandro Pilotti wrote:
That's IMO a different story: backporting a driver is usually quite
trivial as it affects only one service (nova-compute) and one
interaction point with Nova (the driver's interface). Between Havana and
Grizzly for example, the entire Hyper-V
On Aug 27, 2013, at 18:40 , Joe Gordon
joe.gord...@gmail.commailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
berra...@redhat.commailto:berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:55:03AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM,
On 08/27/2013 12:04 PM, Alessandro Pilotti wrote:
On Aug 27, 2013, at 18:52 , Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com
mailto:rbry...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:53 AM, Alessandro Pilotti wrote:
That's IMO a different story: backporting a driver is usually quite
trivial as it
On 08/27/2013 12:04 PM, Tim Smith wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com
mailto:rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
What about publishing the API as blacklisted by default? This way it
would be available only to users that enable it explicitly, while
This message has gone out a number of times but I want to stress
(particularly to those submitting to Cinder) the importance of logging
accurate recheck information. Please take the time to view the logs on a
Jenkins fail before blindly entering recheck no bug. This is happening
fairly
On 08/27/2013 11:22 AM, Sandy Walsh wrote:
On 08/27/2013 05:32 AM, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
Jay,
I should probably share to you about our work around DB.
Migrations should be run only in production and only for production
backends (e.g. psql and mysql)
In tests we should use Schemas created by
I wonder if there's any sort of automation we can apply to this, for
example having known rechecks have signatures and if a failure matches
the signature it auto applies the recheck.
Alex
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:18 AM, John Griffith
john.griff...@solidfire.comwrote:
This message has gone
Some services/components are related or have dependencies on other
services and components.As an example, in HDP, the Hive service depends
on HBase and Zookeeper.In Savanna, there is no way to express this
relationship.If a user wanted to deploy Hive, they would need to know to
install both
On 08/27/2013 04:32 AM, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
Jay,
I should probably share to you about our work around DB.
Migrations should be run only in production and only for production
backends (e.g. psql and mysql)
In tests we should use Schemas created by Models
(BASE.metadata.create_all())
Agree
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:13:49PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/27/2013 12:04 PM, Tim Smith wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com
mailto:rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
What about publishing the API as blacklisted by default? This way it
While it's true that there won't be an in-tree driver that supports
the API for this release cycle, we have a commercial driver that
supports it ( https://github.com/gridcentric/cobalt).
IMHO, out of tree virt drivers are completely out of scope here. We
change the virt driver API at will,
Today's Hyper-V meeting minutes:
Minutes:
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-08-27-16.06.html
Minutes (text):
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-08-27-16.06.txt
Log:
Hi!
For VPNaaS there are some attributes, like the Dead Peer Detection interval and
timeout, that have some dependencies (timeout should be interval). Another
example, is the minimum value for the MTU attribute, which would differ,
depending upon whether IPv4 or IPv6 is being used.
I see
Jay,
We are not able to use in this approach in moment because we don't have
any mechanism to check that MODELS and SCHEMAS are EQUAL.
And actually MODELS and SCHEMAS are DIFFERENT.
Sorry, I don't understand the connection... how does not having a codified
way of determining the difference
Hello,
Please see my answers inline and my previous email regarding this topic:
Hello,
This conversion is actually quite simple. We are currently working to
support alembic migrations in ceilometer:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/convert-to-alembic
For now we agreed that
Hi,
Instead of spending tons of times through these mailing lists lets make a
code and reviews:
There is already RoadMap about what we should do.
1. Sync DB.Models with result of migrations
2. Sync migrations for different backends
3. (OSLO) Merge checker that all is synced in
On Aug 26, 2013, at 10:23 AM, Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
Is anyone working on/planning on adding support for neutron to grenade? Or
is there any other automated upgrade testing going on for neutron?
We
Good idea!
Only thing I would point out is there are a fair amount of changes, especially
lately, where code is just moving from one portion of the project to another,
so there may be cases where someone ends up being authoritative over code they
don't totally understand.
From: Alessandro
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:
Excerpts from John Griffith's message of 2013-08-27 09:42:37 -0700:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Alex Gaynor alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if there's any sort of automation we can apply to this, for
example
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
IMO, to be the healthiest project we can be, we must focus on what code
is actually a part of Nova. If you'd like to submit your changes for
inclusion into Nova, then we can talk.
That's ultimately what we're trying
On 08/27/2013 01:30 PM, Matt Dietz wrote:
Good idea!
Only thing I would point out is there are a fair amount of changes,
especially lately, where code is just moving from one portion of the
project to another, so there may be cases where someone ends up being
authoritative over code they
Hi all,
We've been working hard during the last couple of weeks with some
people. Brian Waldon helped a lot designing the Glance integration and
driver testing. Dean Troyer helped a lot on bringing Docker support in
Devstack[1]. On top of that, we got several feedback on the Nova code
review
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 02:50:16PM +1000, Ian Wienand wrote:
Hi,
The current heat puppet modules don't work to create the heat config
file [1]
My first attempt [2] created separate config files for each heat
component. It was pointed out that configuration had been
consolidated into a
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Clark Boylan clark.boy...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:
Excerpts from John Griffith's message of 2013-08-27 09:42:37 -0700:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Alex Gaynor alex.gay...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/27/2013 01:30 PM, Matt Dietz wrote:
Good idea!
Only thing I would point out is there are a fair amount of changes,
especially lately, where code is just moving from one portion of the
project to another,
Going back to the original discussion, something I've noticed recently is
the large patches coming through tied to blueprints. In at least a few
cases I've made comments in patches asking them to be broken up to be more
easily digested. The wiki also covers that area:
The Heat team holds a weekly meeting in #openstack-meeting, see
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/HeatAgenda for more details
The next meeting is on Wed August 28th at 2000 UTC
Current topics for discussion:
* Review last week's actions
* Reminder re Havana_Release_Schedule
We had some recent discussions regarding the Heat mission statement and
came up with:
To explicitly model the relationships between OpenStack resources of all
kinds; and to harness those models, expressed in forms accessible to both
humans and machines, to manage infrastructure resources
Thank you. I appreciate you handling it.
P
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone
Original message
From: Alessandro Pilotti apilo...@cloudbasesolutions.com
Date: 08/27/2013 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: [openstack-dev] Hyper-V
I have a really simple 1-line change that was looking like it was going to get
merged but then infra had their issues. Since then I fear that it'll just
linger. I appreciate anyone who can take the time to check out this simple
change.
It is at:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/42242/
Thank
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Elizabeth Krumbach Joseph
l...@princessleia.com wrote:
The OpenStack Infrastructure (Infra) team is hosting our weekly
meeting tomorrow, Tuesday August 27th, at 19:00 UTC in
#openstack-meeting
Logs and minutes:
Minutes:
Greetings,
One of the important things to strive for in our community is consensus.
When there's not consensus, we should take a step back and see if we
need to change directions.
There has been a lot of iterating on this feature, and I'm afraid we
still don't have consensus around the design.
This change:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/43298/
Is attempting to fix a bug where a tempest test fails when nova-manage
--version is different from nova-manage version when using a RHEL 6
installation rather than devstack.
Pavel points out an RDO bug that was filed back in April to
On 28 August 2013 06:32, John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com wrote:
All great ideas, but really isn't the core of the issue rate of new patches
rate of available reviewers?
Seems to me that with the growth of the projects and more people
contributing the number of people actively
Indeed, sorry for the distraction!
Alex
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:23 AM, John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Clark Boylan clark.boy...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:
Excerpts from
Hi folks,
migration of all Savanna sub projects to pbr has been completed.
Please, inform us and/or create bugs for all packaging-related issues.
Thanks.
Sincerely yours,
Sergey Lukjanov
Savanna Technical Lead
Mirantis Inc.
___
OpenStack-dev
On 28 August 2013 06:54, Steven Hardy sha...@redhat.com wrote:
We had some recent discussions regarding the Heat mission statement and
came up with:
To explicitly model the relationships between OpenStack resources of all
kinds; and to harness those models, expressed in forms accessible to
http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-30.txt
http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt
- Derek is reviewing fairly regularly and has got a sense of the
culture etc now, I think.
So - calling for votes for Derek to become a TripleO core reviewer!
I
Hi all,
I’m working on custmoizing modal form for topology view, I would like to prevent
redirecting after submitting.
https://github.com/openstack/horizon/blob/master/horizon/static/horizon/js/horizon.modals.js#L110
According to this code, if there is a no redirect_header, the modal
form won't
+1 here
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.netwrote:
http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-30.txt
http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt
- Derek is reviewing fairly regularly and has got a sense of the
Hi
On 27 August 2013 22:25, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
So - calling for votes for Derek to become a TripleO core reviewer
+1
I think we're nearly at the point where we can switch to the 'two
+2's' model - what do you think?
Selfishly I'd quite like to see a little
On 27/08/13 23:13, Robert Collins wrote:
I think there is some confusion about implementation vs intent here
:). Or at least I hope so. I wouldn't expect Nova's mission statement
to talk about 'modelling virtual machines' : modelling is internal
jargon, not a mission!
So, I don't really agree
On 27/08/13 15:23, Maru Newby wrote:
On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Yongsheng Gong gong...@unitedstack.com wrote:
First 'be like nova-network' is a merit for some deployments.
I'm afraid 'merit' is a bit vague for me. Would you please elaborate?
One area of 'merit' in this area is for
On 27/08/13 19:20 +0100, Steven Hardy wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 02:50:16PM +1000, Ian Wienand wrote:
Hi,
The current heat puppet modules don't work to create the heat config
file [1]
My first attempt [2] created separate config files for each heat
component. It was pointed out that
Greetings stackers!
We are deep in the freeze ... so here's what people are working on in the
VMwareAPI sub-team and here's the reviews in order from most ready on top to
least ready on the bottom. Some of these are *very* ready with 8 +1 reviews...
others need some attention and revision.
Definitely, +1 ;-)
--
Shane
From: Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 11:40 PM
To: Daniel P. Berrange; OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Daniel P.
On Aug 27, 2013, at 3:27 PM, Tom Fifield t...@openstack.org wrote:
On 27/08/13 15:23, Maru Newby wrote:
On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Yongsheng Gong gong...@unitedstack.com wrote:
First 'be like nova-network' is a merit for some deployments.
I'm afraid 'merit' is a bit vague for me.
Russell,
Thanks for the reminder to follow up on list.
To summarize my read of this thread, the strong consensus seems to be to
keep the detailed mechanics of building individual operating systems out
of nova itself. It also seems there's no universally agreed upon
alternative location for it
[Concerns over review wait times in the nova project]
I think that we're also seeing the fact that nova-core's are also
developers. nova-core members have the same feature freeze deadline,
and that means that to a certain extent we need to stop reviewing in
order to get our own code ready by the
Why not a rotation though, I could see it beneficial to say have a group of
active developers code for say a release then those developers rotate to a
reviewer position only (and rotate again for every release). This allows for a
flow of knowledge between reviewers and a different set of coders
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
[Concerns over review wait times in the nova project]
I think that we're also seeing the fact that nova-core's are also
developers. nova-core members have the same feature freeze deadline,
and that means that to a
Joshua, I do not think such a strict and coarse scheduling is a practical
way to manage developers, who have highly individualized talents,
backgrounds, and interests.
Regards,
Mike
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
-Original Message-
From: Michael Still [mailto:mi...@stillhq.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 7:45 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
[Concerns over review wait times in the nova project]
I think
77 matches
Mail list logo
