[openstack-dev] [nova] nova backup not working in stable/icehouse?

Looking to put a proper implementation of instance backup into OpenStack. Started by writing a simple set of baseline tests and running against the stable/icehouse branch. They failed! https://github.com/dreadedhill-work/openstack-backup-scripts Scripts and configuration are in the above. Simple

[openstack-dev] Review change to nova api pretty please?

Hi All, Could someone please do the honor :) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116472/ ? PEP8 failed, but thats not my fault ;) hehe Thanks! Alex ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

I see. Then if a group's ultimate goal is their own project, would the Neutron incubator even make sense as a first step? On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > I think we need some clarification here too about the differ

Re: [openstack-dev] [CEILOMETER] Trending Alarm

On 08/28/2014 08:07 PM, Henrique Truta wrote: Hello, everyone! I want to have an alarm that is triggered by some kind of trend. For example, an alarm that is triggeredwhen the CPU utilization is growing steadly (for example, has grown approximately 10% per 5 minutes, where the percentage and

[openstack-dev] [Octavia] Migration review update

Updated the migration review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114671/3 Added the active_node and spare_node table. Not sure if this is what people had in mind for this, but we do need a table to map load balancer to VMs/nodes/devices, so I figured an active_node table would be appropriate for th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBass] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?

Adding correct subject tags because I replied to the original email. I blame you Susanne! On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 23:47 -0500, Brandon Logan wrote: > I'm not sure exactly how many design sessions will be available but it > seems like 2 for Neutron LBaaS and 2 for Octavia will be hard to > accomplis

Re: [openstack-dev] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?

I'm not sure exactly how many design sessions will be available but it seems like 2 for Neutron LBaaS and 2 for Octavia will be hard to accomplish. Neutron LBaaS had 2 in Atlanta didn't it? One broad one ofr Neutron LBaaS and one more specific to TLS and L7. I'm totally on board for having 2 for

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]pylint errors with hashlib

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014, at 06:45 PM, Murali Balcha wrote: > > Pylint on my patch is failing with the following error: > > > > Module 'hashlib' has no 'sha256' > > > > Cinder pylint already has following exceptions, > > > > > > pylint_exceptions

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] [LBaaS] LBaaS v2 API syntax additions/changes

Hi Yair, On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 07:47 -0400, Yair Fried wrote: > I would like to add a question to John's list > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "John Schwarz" > > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 2:22:33 PM

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Heat Juno Mid-cycle Meetup report

Yes, after version and agent ensuring to pick correct data will not cause Swift issue. On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Steve Baker wrote: > On 28/08/14 03:41, Zane Bitter wrote: > > On 27/08/14 11:04, Steven Hardy wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 07:54:41PM +0530, Jyoti Ranjan wrote: > >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] [LBaaS] LBaaS v2 API syntax additions/changes

On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 14:22 +0300, John Schwarz wrote: > > On 08/25/2014 10:06 PM, Brandon Logan wrote: > >> > >> 2. Therefor, there should be some configuration to specifically enable > >> either version (not both) in case LBaaS is needed. In this case, the > >> other version is disabled (ie. a R

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Using Nova Scheduling Affinity and AntiAffinity

We may have to put quotas or something built into Octavia. Since we are keeping the concept of tenant in Octavia, this may as well be done. That probably doesn't totally solve the problem though. ServerGroups will be great to use for keeping VMs off the same host for HA. It will be tough to use

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

Kyle, Does this apply to blueprints that are destined for the incubator as well? I assume the incubator does require a spec process too. Thanks, Brandon On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 08:37 -0500, Kyle Mestery wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Michael Still wrote: > > For nova we haven't gotten

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Author tags

+1. On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: > > Hi, > > A few cycles ago the Nova group decided to remove @author from copyright > > statements. This is due to the fact that this information is stored in > git. > > After addin

Re: [openstack-dev] [Mistral] Workflow on-finish

Yes, it’s just a regular task that sends a request. Something like: notify_about_completion: action: std.http parameters: url: whatever_we_need.org method: GET You can also take a look at webhooks examples in mistral-extra. Renat Akhmerov @ Mirantis Inc. On 29 Aug 2014, at 01:22,

[openstack-dev] [Horizon] Some thoughts about Horizon's test suite

I'm relatively new to Horizon, but I come with a bunch of experience with Python more generally. I've contributed a couple of small patches to Horizon in an effort to get more familiar with the codebase. Julie Pichon's blog post about testing in Horizon has been invaluable < http://www.jpichon.net/

Re: [openstack-dev] [UX] [Horizon] [Heat] Merlin project (formerly known as cross-project UI library for Heat/Mistral/Murano/Solum) plans for PoC and more

On 28/08/14 13:31, Drago Rosson wrote: You are in luck, because I have just now open-sourced Barricade! Check it out [4]. [4]https://github.com/rackerlabs/barricade Please add a license (preferably ASL 2.0). "Open Source" doesn't mean "the source is on GitHub", it means that the code is licen

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

Susanne-- I think you are conflating the difference between "OpenStack incubation" and "Neutron incubator." These are two very different matters and should be treated separately. So, addressing each one individually: *"OpenStack Incubation"* I think this has been the end-goal of Octavia all along

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > I think we need some clarification here too about the difference between the > general OpenStack Incubation and the Neutron incubation. From my > understanding, the Neutron incubation isn't the path to a separate project > and independence fro

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

On 08/28/2014 03:04 PM, Susanne Balle wrote: > Just for us to learn about the incubator status, here are some of the > info on incubation: > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Approved/Incubation > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/NewProjects These are not the correct document

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

Yeah, I think I agree there. If we were to go the Neutron-incubator route, we'd end up with Neutron-Octavia, and I don't think that's what we want, right? I believe to be "Openstack-Octavia" we need to be incubated as a separate project. --Adam https://keybase.io/rm_you From: Kevin Benton mai

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 08/28/2014 04:01 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh >> mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote: >> >> I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to >> clearly descr

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

Submit it as a patch to the specs repo! On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Alan Kavanagh wrote: > That's a fairly good point Michael, and if that can get correlated to the > proposed incubation section for that project then I believe this would help > alleviate a lot of frustration and help folks

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

I think we need some clarification here too about the difference between the general OpenStack Incubation and the Neutron incubation. From my understanding, the Neutron incubation isn't the path to a separate project and independence from Neutron. It's a process to get into Neutron. So if you want

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Using Nova Scheduling Affinity and AntiAffinity

Hello all, TL;DR Using the SameHostFilter and DifferentHostFilter will work functionally for what Octavia needs for colocation, apolocation, and HA anti-affinity. There are a couple topics that need discussed: How should VMs be allocated per host when evaluating colocation, if each load balancer

[openstack-dev] [nova] Kilo Specs Schedule

We just finished discussing when to open up Kilo specs at the nova meeting today [0], and Kilo specs will open right after we cut Juno RC1 (around Sept 25th [1]). Additionally, the spec template will most likely be revised. We still have a huge amount of work to do for Juno and the nova team is mo

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [ptls] The Czar system, or how to scale PTLs

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > James Polley wrote: > >>> Point of clarification: I've heard PTL=Project Technical Lead > >>> and PTL=Program Technical Lead. Which is it? It is kind of > >>> important as OpenStack grows, because the first is res

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

+1 my sentiments exactly, and this will actually help folks contribute in a more meaningful and productive way. /Alan -Original Message- From: Chris Friesen [mailto:chris.frie...@windriver.com] Sent: August-29-14 12:28 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev]

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 08/28/2014 04:01 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote: I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to clearly describe in the Wiki the process and workflow for the BP approval process and b

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

Joe, This is a resource problem, the nova team simply does not have enough > people doing enough reviews to make this possible. Adding in such case more bureaucracy (specs) is not the best way to resolve team throughput issues... my 2cents Best regards, Boris Pavlovic On Fri, Aug 29, 2014

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

Just for us to learn about the incubator status, here are some of the info on incubation: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Approved/Incubation https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/NewProjects Susanne On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Susanne Balle wrote: > I would like to disc

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh wrote: > I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to clearly > describe in the Wiki the process and workflow for the BP approval process > and build in this process how to deal with discrepancies/disagreements and > build timeframes

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia]

I would like to discuss the pros and cons of putting Octavia into the Neutron LBaaS incubator project right away. If it is going to be the reference implementation for LBaaS v 2 then I believe Octavia belong in Neutron LBaaS v2 incubator. The Pros: * Octavia is in Openstack incubation right away

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

That's a fairly good point Michael, and if that can get correlated to the proposed incubation section for that project then I believe this would help alleviate a lot of frustration and help folks understand what to expect and what are the next steps etc. How do we get this formulated and agreed

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to clearly describe in the Wiki the process and workflow for the BP approval process and build in this process how to deal with discrepancies/disagreements and build timeframes for each stage and process of appeal etc. The current proces

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

+1, that would be the most pragmatic way to address this, silence has different meanings to different people, a response would clarify the ambiguity and misunderstanding. /Alan -Original Message- From: Chris Friesen [mailto:chris.frie...@windriver.com] Sent: August-28-14 11:18 PM To: op

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

I don't think silence ever helps, its better to respond even if it is to disagree, one on one with the person. Alan -Original Message- From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] Sent: August-28-14 11:02 PM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Using Nova Scheduling Affinity and AntiAffinity

We need to be careful. I believe that a user can use these filters to keep requesting VMs in the case of nova to get to the size of your cloud. Also given that nova now has ServerGroups let's not make a quick decision on using something that is being replaced with something better. I suggest we in

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 08/28/2014 03:02 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from core team members may actually be a loud statement about where their priorities are. Or it could be that they haven't looked at it, aren't aware of it, or haven't been paying attenti

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Using Nova Scheduling Affinity and AntiAffinity

Trevor and I just worked through some scenarios to make sure it can handle colocation and apolocation. It looks like it does, however not everything will so simple, especially when we introduce horizontal scaling. Trevor's going to write up an email about some of the caveats but so far just using

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 08/28/2014 04:42 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote: I would contend that that right there is an indication that there's a problem with the process. You submit a BP and then you have no idea of what is happening and no way of addressing any issues. If the priority is wrong I can explain why I think

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 08/28/2014 02:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote: I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong that a BP with multiple positive reviews and

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging] Request to include AMQP 1.0 support in Juno-3

On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 13:36:46 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 13:24 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote: > > On 08/27/2014 03:35 PM, Ken Giusti wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I believe Juno-3 is our last chance to get this feature [1] included > > > into olso.messaging. > > > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Using Nova Scheduling Affinity and AntiAffinity

I'm trying to think of a use case that wouldn't be satisfied using those filters and am not coming up with anything. As such, I don't see a problem using them to fulfill our requirements around colocation and apolocation. Stephen On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Brandon Logan wrote: > Yeah we

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

I would contend that that right there is an indication that there's a problem with the process. You submit a BP and then you have no idea of what is happening and no way of addressing any issues. If the priority is wrong I can explain why I think the priority should be higher, getting stonewal

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote: I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong that a BP with multiple positive reviews and no negative reviews is dropped because of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Using Nova Scheduling Affinity and AntiAffinity

Yeah we were looking at the SameHost and DifferentHost filters and that will probably do what we need. Though I was hoping we could do a combination of both but we can make it work with those filters I believe. Thanks, Brandon On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 14:56 -0400, Susanne Balle wrote: > Brandon >

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA] Picking a Name for the Tempest Library

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:26:25AM -0400, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 03:14:21PM -0400, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > > > So as part of splitting out common functionality from tempest into a > > library [1] > > we need to create a new repository. Which means w

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On Aug 28, 2014, at 3:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/28/2014 03:06 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >> On 08/28/2014 02:21 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 08/28/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez > wr

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote: I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong that a BP with multiple positive reviews and no negative reviews is dropped because of what looks like indifference. I would posit

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On 08/28/2014 03:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/28/2014 03:06 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >> On 08/28/2014 02:21 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 08/28/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez > wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] change to deprecation policy in the incubator

On Aug 28, 2014, at 12:14 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Before Juno we set a deprecation policy for graduating libraries that said > the incubated versions of the modules would stay in the incubator repository > for one full cycle after graduation. This gives projects time to adopt the > librari

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On 08/28/2014 03:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 08/28/2014 03:06 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/28/2014 02:21 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 08/28/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, I've been thi

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote: I’ll try and not whine about my pet project but I do think there is a problem here. For the Gantt project to split out the scheduler there is a crucial BP that needs to be implemented ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89893/ ) and, unfortunately,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Aug 28, 2014, at 2:16 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/28/2014 02:07 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Sean Dague > > wrote: >> >>On 08/28/2014 12:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> >>> On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Aug 28, 2014, at 2:15 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/28/2014 01:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >> On Aug 28, 2014, at 1:17 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> >>> On 08/28/2014 12:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/27/2014 05:27 PM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Octavia VM image design

I agree with Michael. We need to use the OpenStack tooling. Sahara is encountering some of the same issues we are as they are building up their hadoop VM/clusters. See http://docs.openstack.org/developer/sahara/userdoc/vanilla_plugin.html http://docs.openstack.org/developer/sahara/userdoc/diskim

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit > format to make it more productive. I've heard the feedback from the > mid-cycle meetups and would like to apply some of those ideas for Paris, > with

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On 08/28/2014 03:06 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 08/28/2014 02:21 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 08/28/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >>> On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I've been thinking

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBass] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?

Let's use a different email thread to discuss if Octavia should be part of the Neutron incubator project right away or not. I would like to keep the two discussions separate. Susanne On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Stephen Balukoff wrote: > Hi Susanne-- > > Regarding the Octavia sessions:

Re: [openstack-dev] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?

Let's use a different email thread to discuss if Octavia should be part of the Neutron incubator project right away or not. I would like to keep the two discussions separate. Susanne On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Susanne Balle wrote: > > LBaaS team, > > As we discussed in the Weekly LBaaS

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBass] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?

Hi Susanne-- Regarding the Octavia sessions: I think we probably will have enough to discuss that we could use two design sessions. However, I also think that we can probably come to conclusions on whether Octavia should become a part of Neutron Incubator right away via discussion on this mailin

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On 08/28/2014 02:21 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 08/28/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit format to make it more pro

Re: [openstack-dev] [Octavia] Using Nova Scheduling Affinity and AntiAffinity

Brandon I am not sure how ready that nova feature is for general use and have asked our nova lead about that. He is on vacation but should be back by the start of next week. I believe this is the right approach for us moving forward. We cannot make it mandatory to run the 2 filters but we can say

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [neutron] [tc] Neutron Incubator workflow

Yes, in theory all of the plugins should be removable from the core neutron repo. So then it would only need to be responsible for the APIs, db models, etc. However, IIRC there are no plans to move any reference plugins from the tree. On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 01:04:57AM +, Dugger, Donald D wrote: > > I'll try and not whine about my pet project but I do think there > > is a problem here. For the Gantt project to split out the scheduler > > there is a crucial BP th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Mistral] Workflow on-finish

Is there an example somewhere that I can reference on how to define this special task? Thanks! On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:02 PM, Renat Akhmerov wrote: > Right now, you can just include a special task into a workflow that, for > example, sends an HTTP request to whatever you need to notify abou

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On 08/28/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >> On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez >> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design >>> Summit format to make it more productive. I've heard

[openstack-dev] Launch of a instance failed

Hi i am deploying a devstack juno on ubuntu 14.04 server virtual machine. After installation,when i am trying to launch a instance,its failed. I am getting "host not found" error. Below is part of /opt/stack/logs/screen/screen-n-cond.log Below is ther error 2014-08-28 23:44:59.448 ERROR nova.sche

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [neutron] [tc] Neutron Incubator workflow

On 2014-08-28 08:31:26 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote: [...] > DVR completely changed the reference L3 service plugin, which > lives in the main tree.  > > A well-defined, versioned internal API would not have helped any > of the issues I brought up. [...] Except, perhaps, insofar as that (in

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:17 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > David Kranz wrote: > > On 08/27/2014 03:43 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 08/27/2014 03:33 PM, David Kranz wrote: > >>> Race conditions are what makes debugging very hard. I think we are in > >>> the process of experimenting with such an ide

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On 08/28/2014 02:07 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Sean Dague > wrote: > > On 08/28/2014 12:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague > wrote: > > > >> On 0

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On 08/28/2014 01:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Aug 28, 2014, at 1:17 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 08/28/2014 12:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> >>> On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 08/27/2014 05:27 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:54 PM,

[openstack-dev] [CEILOMETER] Trending Alarm

Hello, everyone! I want to have an alarm that is triggered by some kind of trend. For example, an alarm that is triggeredwhen the CPU utilization is growing steadly (for example, has grown approximately 10% per 5 minutes, where the percentage and time window would be parameters, but then I wo

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > I usually use the functions for editing ENABLED_SERVICES. Is it still > common to edit the variable directly? > > Not generally. It was looking at it in log files to see what was/was not enabled where I started to think about that. The de

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/28/2014 12:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > > > >> On 08/27/2014 05:27 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >>> > >>> On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > >>> > Note: thread in

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Design Summit reloaded

On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit format to make it more productive. I've heard the feedback from the mid-cycle meetups and would like to apply s

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Aug 28, 2014, at 1:17 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/28/2014 12:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >> On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> >>> On 08/27/2014 05:27 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > Note: thread intentiona

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Aug 28, 2014, at 1:00 PM, Dean Troyer wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > In my case, a neutron call failed. Most of the other services seem to have a > *-api.log file, but neutron doesn’t. It took a little while to find the > API-related messages in screen-q-

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging] Request to include AMQP 1.0 support in Juno-3

On Aug 28, 2014, at 8:36 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 13:24 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote: >> On 08/27/2014 03:35 PM, Ken Giusti wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I believe Juno-3 is our last chance to get this feature [1] included >>> into olso.messaging. >>> >>> I honestly belie

Re: [openstack-dev] [UX] [Horizon] [Heat] Merlin project (formerly known as cross-project UI library for Heat/Mistral/Murano/Solum) plans for PoC and more

Timur, Composable entities can be a real need for Heat if provider templates (which allow templates to be used as a resource, with a template’s parameters and outputs becoming properties and attributes, respectively) are to be included in the app. A provider template resource, since it is a templa

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Notes on developing Sahara Spark EDP to work with swift:// paths

Hi Michael, I have an update to this patch with temp auth authentication also, but it's not yet submitted. I am not aware of v3 support. All the best, Gil. From: Michael McCune To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" Date: 28/08/2014 08:14 PM Subject:

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

+1 I agree that this is a good idea. Regards, Mandeep On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 08/28/2014 12:50 PM, Michael Still wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:51:32AM +, Alan Kavanagh wro

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [neutron] [tc] Neutron Incubator workflow

I have another question about incubator proposal, for CLI and GUI. Do we imply that the incubator feature will need to branch python-neutron client, Horizon, and or Nova ( if changes are needed)? On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:09 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > Hi, > > After reading https://wiki.opens

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On 08/28/2014 12:48 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 08/27/2014 05:27 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> >>> On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> Note: thread intentionally broken, this is really a different topic. On 08/

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

On 08/28/2014 12:50 PM, Michael Still wrote: On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:51:32AM +, Alan Kavanagh wrote: How to do we handle specs that have slipped through the cracks and did not make it for Juno? Rebase the proposal so it is und

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Notes on developing Sahara Spark EDP to work with swift:// paths

hi Gil, that's cool about the patch to Spark, has there been any talk about upgrading that patch to include Keystone v3 operations? - Original Message - > Hi, > > In case this is helpful for you, this is the patch i submitted to Spark > about Swift and Spark integration ( about to be me

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Notes on developing Sahara Spark EDP to work with swift:// paths

Gil, thanks! I'll take a look. Trevor On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 19:31 +0300, Gil Vernik wrote: > Hi, > > In case this is helpful for you, this is the patch i submitted to > Spark about Swift and Spark integration ( about to be merged ) > https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1010 > > I sent in

Re: [openstack-dev] [Spam] Re: [Openstack][TripleO] [Ironic] What if undercloud machines down, can we reboot overcloud machines?

On August 28, 2014 8:58:11 AM PDT, Clint Byrum wrote: >Excerpts from Jyoti Ranjan's message of 2014-08-27 21:20:19 -0700: >> I do agree but it create an extra requirement for Undercloud if we >high >> availability is important criteria. Because of this, undercloud has >to be >> there 24x7, 365 d

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > In my case, a neutron call failed. Most of the other services seem to have > a *-api.log file, but neutron doesn’t. It took a little while to find the > API-related messages in screen-q-svc.txt (I’m glad I’ve been around long > enough to kn

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:51:32AM +, Alan Kavanagh wrote: >> How to do we handle specs that have slipped through the cracks >> and did not make it for Juno? > > Rebase the proposal so it is under the 'kilo' directory path > instead

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] gate debugging

On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/27/2014 05:27 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >> On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> >>> Note: thread intentionally broken, this is really a different topic. >>> >>> On 08/27/2014 02:30 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:> On Aug 27,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] python namespaces considered harmful to development, lets not introduce more of them

On 08/28/2014 12:22 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Aug 28, 2014, at 6:41 AM, Radomir Dopieralski > wrote: > >> On 27/08/14 16:31, Sean Dague wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>> In python 2.7 (using pip) namespaces are a bolt on because of the way >>> importing modules works. And depending on how you in

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Notes on developing Sahara Spark EDP to work with swift:// paths

Hi, In case this is helpful for you, this is the patch i submitted to Spark about Swift and Spark integration ( about to be merged ) https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1010 I sent information about this patch to this mailing list about two months ago. All the best, Gil. From: Trevor M

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] python namespaces considered harmful to development, lets not introduce more of them

On Aug 28, 2014, at 6:41 AM, Radomir Dopieralski wrote: > On 27/08/14 16:31, Sean Dague wrote: > > [snip] > >> In python 2.7 (using pip) namespaces are a bolt on because of the way >> importing modules works. And depending on how you install things in a >> namespace will overwrite the base __i

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [neutron] [tc] Neutron Incubator workflow

On Aug 28, 2014, at 10:45 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 08/27/2014 04:28 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: >> What are you talking about? The only reply was from me clarifying that >> one of the purposes of the incubator was for components of neutron that >> are experimental but are intended to be merged. >

[openstack-dev] [oslo] change to deprecation policy in the incubator

Before Juno we set a deprecation policy for graduating libraries that said the incubated versions of the modules would stay in the incubator repository for one full cycle after graduation. This gives projects time to adopt the libraries and still receive bug fixes to the incubated version (see

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Gerrit Downtime on August 30, 2014

Flavio Percoco writes: > On 08/28/2014 05:39 PM, James E. Blair wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Gerrit will be unavailable starting at 1600-1630 UTC on Saturday, >> August 30, 2014 to rename the glance.store project to glancestore. > > I went with glance_store > > Hope that's fine! Even better! > Thanks a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Spam] Re: [Openstack][TripleO] [Ironic] What if undercloud machines down, can we reboot overcloud machines?

Excerpts from Jyoti Ranjan's message of 2014-08-27 21:20:19 -0700: > I do agree but it create an extra requirement for Undercloud if we high > availability is important criteria. Because of this, undercloud has to be > there 24x7, 365 days and to make it available we need to have HA for this > also

[openstack-dev] [neutron] VPNaaS pending state handling

https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1355360 I'm working on this vpn vendor bug and am looking for guidance on the approach. I'm also relatively new to neutron development so bear with some newbie gaffs :) The problem reported in this bug, in a nutshell, is the policies in the neutron vpn db a

  1   2   >