| *** fnaval has joined #openstack-lbaas | 00:04 | |
| *** mageshgv has joined #openstack-lbaas | 00:04 | |
| *** xgerman has quit IRC | 00:07 | |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: I'll have a look at it later tonight (probably after midnight). Sorry! Other things on my plate right now. :P | 00:09 |
|---|---|---|
| sbalukoff | I would like to review it, since I had a lot of feedback last time. :) | 00:09 |
| sbalukoff | Sorry for being a bottleneck there. :P | 00:09 |
| *** VijayB has quit IRC | 00:10 | |
| *** VijayB has joined #openstack-lbaas | 00:15 | |
| *** VijayB has quit IRC | 00:19 | |
| *** VijayB_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 00:22 | |
| *** mageshgv has quit IRC | 00:28 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 00:31 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-lbaas | 00:32 | |
| *** crc32 has quit IRC | 00:46 | |
| *** VijayB_ has quit IRC | 00:52 | |
| *** VijayB has joined #openstack-lbaas | 00:54 | |
| *** VijayB has quit IRC | 00:55 | |
| *** VijayB has joined #openstack-lbaas | 00:57 | |
| *** VijayB has quit IRC | 01:13 | |
| *** VijayB_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:16 | |
| *** VijayB_ has quit IRC | 01:27 | |
| *** xgerman has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:33 | |
| *** sbfox has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:35 | |
| *** VijayB_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:38 | |
| *** xgerman has quit IRC | 01:38 | |
| *** johnsom_ has quit IRC | 01:48 | |
| *** pck has quit IRC | 01:48 | |
| *** VijayB_ has quit IRC | 01:48 | |
| *** VijayB_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:50 | |
| *** mestery has quit IRC | 01:53 | |
| *** mestery has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:53 | |
| *** johnsom_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:54 | |
| *** pck has joined #openstack-lbaas | 01:54 | |
| *** xgerman has joined #openstack-lbaas | 02:00 | |
| *** mestery has quit IRC | 02:04 | |
| *** mestery has joined #openstack-lbaas | 02:04 | |
| *** fnaval has quit IRC | 02:21 | |
| *** fnaval has joined #openstack-lbaas | 02:21 | |
| *** fnaval has quit IRC | 02:26 | |
| *** sbfox has quit IRC | 02:33 | |
| *** VijayB_ has quit IRC | 02:38 | |
| *** adhami397 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 02:40 | |
| *** xgerman has quit IRC | 03:02 | |
| *** woodster_ has quit IRC | 03:35 | |
| *** ptoohill has joined #openstack-lbaas | 03:56 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-lbaas | 04:15 | |
| *** xgerman has joined #openstack-lbaas | 04:24 | |
| *** xgerman has quit IRC | 04:35 | |
| *** adhami_7777 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 04:45 | |
| *** adhami397 has quit IRC | 04:47 | |
| *** adhami_7777 has quit IRC | 05:20 | |
| *** rm_you|wtf has joined #openstack-lbaas | 05:56 | |
| *** rm_you| has quit IRC | 06:00 | |
| *** jschwarz has joined #openstack-lbaas | 07:49 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 08:41 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-lbaas | 08:57 | |
| openstackgerrit | A change was merged to stackforge/octavia: Adding Octavia Amphora base image specification for Octavia v0.5 https://review.openstack.org/121703 | 09:34 |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 10:57 | |
| *** fnaval has joined #openstack-lbaas | 11:41 | |
| *** busterswt has quit IRC | 11:59 | |
| *** woodster_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 11:59 | |
| *** jroyall has quit IRC | 12:33 | |
| *** jroyall has joined #openstack-lbaas | 12:42 | |
| *** jroyall has quit IRC | 13:01 | |
| *** fnaval has quit IRC | 13:14 | |
| *** sballe has joined #openstack-lbaas | 13:17 | |
| *** jroyall has joined #openstack-lbaas | 13:33 | |
| *** sballe has quit IRC | 13:35 | |
| *** fnaval has joined #openstack-lbaas | 13:45 | |
| *** busterswt has joined #openstack-lbaas | 14:02 | |
| *** dkehnx1 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 14:27 | |
| *** woodster_ has quit IRC | 14:36 | |
| *** dougwig has quit IRC | 14:36 | |
| *** ctracey_ has quit IRC | 14:36 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 14:44 | |
| *** woodster_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 14:49 | |
| *** ctracey_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 14:52 | |
| *** dougwig__ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 14:53 | |
| *** ajmiller has quit IRC | 15:07 | |
| *** xgerman has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:07 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has quit IRC | 15:22 | |
| *** ajmiller has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:22 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:24 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has quit IRC | 15:28 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:30 | |
| TrevorV_ | sbalukoff, can I pester you a minute? | 15:38 |
| TrevorV_ | rm_work, rm_you|wtf you around atm? | 15:42 |
| *** rm_you|wtf is now known as rm_yo | 15:42 | |
| *** rm_yo is now known as rm_you | 15:42 | |
| rm_you | yes | 15:42 |
| TrevorV_ | gonna message you in private chat again | 15:42 |
| rm_you | was just about to head in, but k | 15:42 |
| *** rm_you has quit IRC | 15:42 | |
| *** rm_you has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:42 | |
| *** rohara1 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:46 | |
| *** mlavalle has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:46 | |
| *** rohara has quit IRC | 15:49 | |
| *** rohara2 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 15:52 | |
| *** dkehnx1 has quit IRC | 15:54 | |
| *** rohara1 has quit IRC | 15:54 | |
| *** jschwarz has quit IRC | 16:08 | |
| *** mestery has quit IRC | 16:09 | |
| *** mestery has joined #openstack-lbaas | 16:10 | |
| rm_work | blogan: hey | 16:25 |
| blogan | rm_work: hi | 16:25 |
| *** sbfox has joined #openstack-lbaas | 16:33 | |
| xgerman | hi | 16:38 |
| xgerman | I am swamped with a lot of HP internal stuff but I will try to get back fixing my spec soon | 16:39 |
| *** masteinhauser_ is now known as masteinhauser | 16:58 | |
| *** rohara2 has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** xgerman has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** busterswt has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** jroyall has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** rohara2 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:00 | |
| *** xgerman has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:00 | |
| *** busterswt has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:00 | |
| *** jroyall has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:00 | |
| *** mestery has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** barclaac has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** masteinhauser has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** mestery has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:02 | |
| *** barclaac has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:02 | |
| *** masteinhauser has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:02 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has quit IRC | 17:02 | |
| *** ctracey_ has quit IRC | 17:02 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:03 | |
| *** ctracey_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:03 | |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: I know the feeling. :) | 17:20 |
| sbalukoff | TrevorV_: I'm here now. Did you sitll have a question? | 17:20 |
| sbalukoff | still. | 17:20 |
| TrevorV_ | sbalukoff, sort of, its a new question, except I'm not sure how good your python is :D | 17:21 |
| TrevorV_ | I got the other one answered already via rm_you | 17:21 |
| sbalukoff | My python sucks. But feel free to ask anyway (someone here might... will probably... have a better answer than me. :) | 17:22 |
| rm_work | heh | 17:23 |
| rm_work | TrevorV_: well I am here again | 17:23 |
| TrevorV_ | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/120927/ | 17:23 |
| TrevorV_ | That's the review I'm working on | 17:23 |
| TrevorV_ | In the repositories work, I was working with the DB object, not the data_model object. | 17:23 |
| TrevorV_ | Now that I've updated the methods to use the data_model object, a lot of tests fail because of fields not being populated during conversion | 17:24 |
| TrevorV_ | I'm trying to track down how to fix that | 17:24 |
| TrevorV_ | So more than "a question" its "I'm not sure how to troublshoot this" | 17:24 |
| rm_work | ugh, gl;hf | 17:24 |
| TrevorV_ | right | 17:24 |
| TrevorV_ | ha ha | 17:24 |
| sbalukoff | Oh, right-- I haven't actually been following that review because it's "-1 workflow" right now. | 17:24 |
| rm_work | i had to deal with that a little in the barbican models | 17:24 |
| rm_work | it's | 17:24 |
| rm_work | ugh | 17:24 |
| sbalukoff | I'll have a look, but don't anticipate I'll have a good answer. | 17:25 |
| rm_work | well, maybe it is slightly different... may have time to look today | 17:25 |
| TrevorV_ | Yeah, I'm working on it. blogan wrote the original mapper there, but I think he's a lunchin | 17:25 |
| sbalukoff | Haha! | 17:25 |
| rm_work | right now I am hungry and was hoping people would want lunch but NO ONE is here T_T | 17:25 |
| sbalukoff | I thought you said 'lynchpin' for a second. | 17:25 |
| *** VijayB has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:26 | |
| rm_work | blah Jorge prolly went to freebirds | 17:26 |
| rm_work | fff maybe i'll grab wingstop | 17:26 |
| rm_work | really felt like wings today | 17:26 |
| rm_work | after blogan teasing me with the possibility of wings | 17:26 |
| rm_work | and then shooting down my hopes and dreams | 17:26 |
| sbalukoff | Does he find your tears of disappointment delicious? | 17:28 |
| rm_work | I don't know, he disappeared >_< | 17:30 |
| *** dougwig__ is now known as dougwig | 17:30 | |
| TrevorV_ | sbalukoff, he's feasting on them as we speak | 17:32 |
| rm_work | TrevorV_: YOU DON'T KNOW | 17:32 |
| rm_work | T_T | 17:32 |
| TrevorV_ | blogan!!! HE'S SHEDDING MORE FOR YOU | 17:33 |
| * rm_work orders wings | 17:33 | |
| TrevorV_ | I would have winged with you mang. Just WFH doesn't really help me do that :D | 17:33 |
| rm_work | heh | 17:36 |
| *** sbfox has quit IRC | 17:42 | |
| *** sbfox has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:48 | |
| *** crc32 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 17:52 | |
| openstackgerrit | Trevor Vardeman proposed a change to stackforge/octavia: Initial creation of repository classes and tests https://review.openstack.org/120927 | 17:56 |
| *** VijayB has quit IRC | 17:58 | |
| *** ptoohill-oo has joined #openstack-lbaas | 18:04 | |
| *** sbfox has quit IRC | 18:04 | |
| *** ptoohill has quit IRC | 18:04 | |
| *** VijayB_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 18:06 | |
| *** jorgem has joined #openstack-lbaas | 18:12 | |
| *** sbfox has joined #openstack-lbaas | 18:13 | |
| openstackgerrit | Trevor Vardeman proposed a change to stackforge/octavia: Initial creation of repository classes and tests https://review.openstack.org/120927 | 18:21 |
| *** sballe has joined #openstack-lbaas | 18:36 | |
| TrevorV_ | dougwig, I'm adding another change to the models | 18:45 |
| TrevorV_ | Hopefully I can help with that one comment now :D | 18:45 |
| openstackgerrit | Trevor Vardeman proposed a change to stackforge/octavia: Initial creation of db models, modules, and tests https://review.openstack.org/116718 | 18:45 |
| openstackgerrit | Trevor Vardeman proposed a change to stackforge/octavia: Initial creation of repository classes and tests https://review.openstack.org/120927 | 18:46 |
| *** sballe_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 19:19 | |
| *** sballe has quit IRC | 19:22 | |
| TrevorV_ | sbalukoff, I screwed up my action item last week :( | 19:30 |
| openstackgerrit | Trevor Vardeman proposed a change to stackforge/octavia: Initial creation of repository classes and tests https://review.openstack.org/120927 | 19:31 |
| TrevorV_ | for every patch set I have to re-mark it as WIP? | 19:34 |
| TrevorV_ | That's kinda monotonous. | 19:35 |
| TrevorV_ | rebooting, brb | 19:35 |
| *** TrevorV_ has quit IRC | 19:35 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 19:37 | |
| rm_work | TrevorV_: yep, wish the WIP status would carry over, but I guess it makes sense, because maybe THIS PATCHSET is finally done? :P | 19:40 |
| TrevorV_ | Yeah, that makes sense. | 19:40 |
| blogan | i think it'd make more sense to require changing it off of WIP | 19:40 |
| TrevorV_ | I can see both understandings | 19:41 |
| dougwig | i've always thought that wip should be sticky, if done by the submitter. | 19:41 |
| *** vivek-ebay has joined #openstack-lbaas | 19:45 | |
| sbalukoff | Does anyone have additional items they'd like to discuss for today's meeting? https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Octavia/Weekly_Meeting_Agenda#Agenda | 19:45 |
| rm_work | yeah | 19:45 |
| rm_work | (not @ sbalukoff) | 19:46 |
| rm_work | err well | 19:46 |
| sbalukoff | Yeah, gerrit could definitely be improved. :P | 19:46 |
| rm_work | this freaking keystone stuff makes me want to pull all my hair out | 19:46 |
| rm_work | but that's a neutron issue not an octavia issue <_< | 19:47 |
| rm_work | BTW I am curious about what people think of pep8 | 19:47 |
| rm_work | I just posted a small rant in another channel... | 19:47 |
| rm_work | my feelings on pep8 are that it's a great guide for people to stay consistent, and if there's more than one way to do something, and one way violates pep8, you should go with the pep8 way and that's great... but pep8 shouldn't actively stand in the way of usability, and if it does, it should be able to be ignored | 19:48 |
| sbalukoff | I can add that to the schedule to discuss if you'd like. | 19:49 |
| sbalukoff | It probably is worth getting on the same page about it. | 19:49 |
| rm_work | there's a lot of pep8 that there aren't really exceptions to because there's no way it'd interfere with anything -- for example, how many spaces go somewhere | 19:49 |
| rm_work | but some stuff, like the one i'm dealing with currently "method names must be lowercase" can get in the way when I'm trying to do something very specific :P | 19:49 |
| rm_work | sbalukoff: not sure it really applies to us that directly | 19:49 |
| rm_work | I was just curious | 19:50 |
| rm_work | not worth spending meeting time dicussing, I don't think :P | 19:50 |
| sbalukoff | Well, it does if we're following pep8 (which we are, right now) | 19:50 |
| sbalukoff | That was effectively decided by me when I wrote the initial tox configuration and our (rudimentary as it is) HACKING.rst guide. | 19:50 |
| sbalukoff | If you're just ranting and not really pushing for a change there, then we might not need to discuss it, eh. | 19:51 |
| *** ajmiller_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 19:51 | |
| sbalukoff | (In other words, if your opinion is "I dislike pep8, but we don't really have a better tool to enforce code consistency" then... we could probably all agree to that, and we'd still be using pep8 | 19:52 |
| TrevorV_ | I actually like Pep8 | 19:53 |
| TrevorV_ | Just sayin | 19:53 |
| sbalukoff | Oh, you. | 19:53 |
| TrevorV_ | I do. | 19:53 |
| TrevorV_ | There are things I have a problem with, but you can always define your own paremeters in pep8 right? | 19:53 |
| TrevorV_ | parameters*** is the word I wanted there. | 19:53 |
| sbalukoff | You can define which rules you want enforced. And I think we're generally following the OpenStack best practices here. | 19:54 |
| sbalukoff | I don't know enough about it to say whether there's a simple way to mark expections in code. | 19:54 |
| sbalukoff | (Eg. comment directly before that says: Yes, I know the next line violates pep8. But we're doing that intentionally, so don't return an error here.) | 19:55 |
| *** dlundquist has joined #openstack-lbaas | 19:55 | |
| dougwig | pep8/hacking is really water under the openstack bridge. i hate the 80 column restriction; makes for some silly code, and it's not 1995. | 19:55 |
| TrevorV_ | yeah, dougwig has the same complaint I do, but for the most part I can't say I complain | 19:56 |
| dougwig | and pep8 even allows for wider columns; it's the openstack restrictions that are much stricter. | 19:56 |
| TrevorV_ | That's kinda exactly my point. | 19:56 |
| TrevorV_ | Pep8 isn't the problem here | 19:56 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Question is: Do you hate that more or do you hate truly shitty code style more? | 19:56 |
| barclaac | dougwig: in the '80s I would always run 132 cols :-) | 19:56 |
| sbalukoff | Aah, I see. | 19:57 |
| dougwig | i like the consistency when a large group of people that come and go work on something. but a few of the rules (import modules only), actively contribute to wider names, so you end up with some truly bizarre indenting. | 19:57 |
| dlundquist | But I can't hack on code on my 40 column Apple II+ | 19:57 |
| barclaac | I'd strongly suggest that we stick to the openstack standard. We want to get incorporated into openstack as easily as possible. | 19:57 |
| xgerman | +1 | 19:57 |
| sbalukoff | Well, we could try to get that changed with the TC: Allow rows to have up to 132 characters. | 19:57 |
| barclaac | If we didn't follow we'd be giving the TC ammunition that they don't need. | 19:58 |
| barclaac | sbalukoff +1 | 19:58 |
| dougwig | 100 is pretty standard in the industry. as long as one width is used, it's all good. | 19:58 |
| barclaac | The point being that you'd have to petition the TC first and get approval. | 19:58 |
| dougwig | +10 on the comment of doing what the openstack standard is, for better or worse. | 19:58 |
| sbalukoff | barclaac: +1 | 19:58 |
| blogan | one reason i like the 80 char limit is I can have windows side by side | 19:58 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Nobody cares about your needs. | 19:58 |
| sbalukoff | It's not always about you. | 19:59 |
| sbalukoff | ;) | 19:59 |
| dougwig | considering that this community won't remove py33 from tox, even though it can't ever build the env... there is some ideology at play. | 19:59 |
| blogan | i thought you cared! | 19:59 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Have you seen many -1's from me lately? | 19:59 |
| dougwig | i'd wager column widths would become a holy war for the ages. | 19:59 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: I like a good crusade. | 19:59 |
| TrevorV_ | yeah, but dougwig, those guys that want that col width are gonna die in like, a few years, so we just wait for that and we're golden | 19:59 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: is that a trick question? | 20:00 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Rhetorical. | 20:00 |
| sbalukoff | Oh crap! | 20:00 |
| dougwig | i just like that we have a coding standard designed when vt100 terminals were all the rage. | 20:00 |
| blogan | i will advocate a column width that allows me to do side by side editors | 20:00 |
| sbalukoff | Meeting time! | 20:00 |
| sbalukoff | #startmeeting Octavia | 20:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Wed Sep 17 20:00:31 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sbalukoff. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:00 |
| blogan | 100 is fine for that as well | 20:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 20:00 |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'octavia' | 20:00 |
| TrevorV_ | o/ | 20:00 |
| dougwig | blogan: 100 does that with widescreen monitors. | 20:00 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, folks! | 20:00 |
| dlundquist | o/ | 20:00 |
| sbalukoff | Potentially short agenda for today. | 20:00 |
| blogan | well what if i want 3 editors side by side? | 20:00 |
| dougwig | 2 monitors? | 20:00 |
| johnsom_ | Hello | 20:00 |
| blogan | then i could have 6! | 20:01 |
| dlundquist | blogan: 4k display? | 20:01 |
| sbalukoff | As usual, agenda is here: | 20:01 |
| blogan | now i can have a lot of editors! | 20:01 |
| sbalukoff | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Octavia/Weekly_Meeting_Agenda#Agenda | 20:01 |
| xgerman | o/ | 20:01 |
| ajmiller_ | o/ | 20:01 |
| blogan | 10 char line limit! | 20:01 |
| blogan | oh hi | 20:01 |
| dougwig | alright,let's settle down for our chair here. :) | 20:01 |
| blogan | meeting started | 20:01 |
| TrevorV_ | #action TrevorV write up 2 weeks worth of meeting notes. | 20:01 |
| TrevorV_ | o_0 | 20:01 |
| sbalukoff | #topic Review progress on gerrit reviews and blueprints | 20:01 |
| sbalukoff | I feel like we're getting good progress on gerrit reviews, but that only a handful of us are doing said reviews presently. | 20:02 |
| sbalukoff | Also, I apologize: I was too distracted with other priorities to actually update any of the blueprints in launchpad this last week. | 20:02 |
| sbalukoff | I will be doing so this week. | 20:02 |
| davidlenwell | o/ | 20:03 |
| davidlenwell | I will start in on helping with the reviews also | 20:03 |
| sbalukoff | Question I have for you, especially those looking to get involved: Is there something we can do to help you get started in particular? | 20:03 |
| *** jwarendt has joined #openstack-lbaas | 20:03 | |
| sbalukoff | Thanks, david | 20:04 |
| TrevorV_ | On this topic, I'd like to draw attention to this review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116718/ | 20:04 |
| *** tmc3inphilly has joined #openstack-lbaas | 20:04 | |
| sbalukoff | (And by "we" I mean "those of us who have been working on LBaaS and Neutron LBaaS for months.) | 20:04 |
| TrevorV_ | It was dependent on the migrations, and since that's merged it would seem prudent to review this one next. | 20:04 |
| davidlenwell | sbalukoff feel free to tag me in gerrit on reviews | 20:04 |
| xgerman | we should probably start an etherpad with links to what we like eyeballs on | 20:04 |
| sbalukoff | davidlenwell: Will do! | 20:04 |
| xgerman | that helped me a lot when we did LBaaS v2 | 20:04 |
| sbalukoff | #action sbalukoff to assign all review work to davidlenwell | 20:04 |
| sbalukoff | #undo | 20:04 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Action object at 0x1f4e310> | 20:04 |
| johnsom_ | +1 on etherpad for reviews | 20:04 |
| blogan | can we have an etherpad listing out all the etherpads as well? | 20:05 |
| blogan | j/k | 20:05 |
| xgerman | that would be the wiki | 20:05 |
| xgerman | :-) | 20:05 |
| blogan | oh snap | 20:05 |
| TrevorV_ | actually blogan that might be helpful, since they don't explicitly show an organizational structure | 20:05 |
| dougwig | i can setup an etherpad again. | 20:05 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Sounds good. Question for you, as well: Is this link helpful for knowing what is in the review queue? | 20:05 |
| sbalukoff | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/stackforge/octavia+status:open,n,z | 20:05 |
| blogan | well | 20:05 |
| dougwig | #action dougwig octavia review etherpad | 20:06 |
| blogan | yeah sbalukoff | 20:06 |
| blogan | thats what iw as going to link | 20:06 |
| dougwig | i use that link, but it doesn't prioritize. | 20:06 |
| davidlenwell | sbalukoff: maybe make that the irc chanels topic | 20:06 |
| blogan | all the reviews are right there | 20:06 |
| sbalukoff | davidlenwell: Good idea! | 20:06 |
| xgerman | well, I still need to figure out what is WIP | 20:06 |
| blogan | that has teh WIP status | 20:06 |
| johnsom_ | I will put that link on our wiki page for easy reference | 20:07 |
| blogan | if there's a big X under W, that means its a WIP | 20:07 |
| *** Vorrtex__ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 20:07 | |
| dougwig | johnsom_: it's already there | 20:07 |
| dougwig | at the top | 20:07 |
| dougwig | :) | 20:07 |
| xgerman | make it bold and blinking | 20:07 |
| * Vorrtex__ power is fluctuating at random... might not be on here consistently | 20:07 | |
| johnsom_ | So it is, cool, missed that | 20:07 |
| sbalukoff | #action sbalukoff to try to update channel topic (even though we don't have ops here) | 20:07 |
| dougwig | i can do that. what topic? | 20:08 |
| blogan | also I thought a good reason to put WIPs in gerrit was so people could look at the direction the code is going and comment on it | 20:08 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/stackforge/octavia+status:open,n,z | 20:08 |
| blogan | not wait for it to get out of WIP and ready for review | 20:08 |
| *** sbfox has quit IRC | 20:08 | |
| dougwig | will set after meeting | 20:09 |
| dougwig | #action dougwig fix lbaas channel topic | 20:09 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Yeah, I've sort of been doing the latter. I'll be more dilligent about reviewing WIP code. | 20:09 |
| blogan | well thats what I thought, I could be wrong | 20:09 |
| xgerman | blogan, you are right but I want to make sure I at least review aht's urgent first :-) | 20:09 |
| dougwig | there are multiple kinds of reviews. the ones where you look for errors, omissions, or not being openstack-y, are kinda useless while WIP. the ones where you want to give design feedback, those are when you go into a WIP. IMO. | 20:10 |
| blogan | xgerman: totally understand, I just wanted to make sure my understanding was correct, not saying any particular WIP should be reviewed right now | 20:10 |
| blogan | dougwig +1 | 20:10 |
| *** TrevorV_ has quit IRC | 20:10 | |
| sbalukoff | In any case, I can certainly put together an etherpad for people to update if they don't think the automatic listing is helpful (since it's not prioritized). We can see how that goes and decide whether it's worth maintaining long-term. | 20:10 |
| xgerman | +1 | 20:10 |
| blogan | those are the most useful reviews in any phase of the review process | 20:10 |
| Vorrtex__ | Forgive me, did we get a page set up with links to reviews? etherpad or wiki? either? | 20:11 |
| sbalukoff | Vorrtex__: There's this automated listing here: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/stackforge/octavia+status:open,n,z | 20:12 |
| sbalukoff | But it is not prioritized by urgency | 20:12 |
| Vorrtex__ | Oh, ha, I've seen this page in passing, but never paid any attention to it. | 20:12 |
| Vorrtex__ | Thanks | 20:12 |
| sbalukoff | Anyway, I'll go ahead and set up that etherpad. | 20:12 |
| sbalukoff | #action sbalukoff to create etherpad listing reviews that need attention in order of urgency. | 20:12 |
| blogan | we can set priorities in the launchpad blueprint page, but it's not easy to get to the reviews from there | 20:13 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: I agree | 20:13 |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o dougwig | 20:13 | |
| xgerman | +1 etherpad | 20:13 |
| sbalukoff | I don't know about y'all but I do find this stand-up etherpad useful as well: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/octavia-weekly-standup | 20:13 |
| sbalukoff | But I notice not everyone updated it this week. | 20:14 |
| *** dougwig changes topic to "Octavia Reviews - https://review.openstack.org/#/q/stackforge/octavia+status:open,n,z" | 20:14 | |
| blogan | ah crap I forgot to update taht | 20:14 |
| blogan | sorry | 20:14 |
| sbalukoff | Would it be useful for me to send a reminder to the mailing list? | 20:14 |
| blogan | yeah | 20:14 |
| sbalukoff | (I had been doing that prior to each meeting, but figured people might find it tiresome.) | 20:14 |
| blogan | you should just utomate it | 20:14 |
| xgerman | blogan, you can also use your won Outlook | 20:14 |
| *** dougwig changes topic to "Octavia Reviews - http://bit.ly/1wqy47t" | 20:14 | |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Yeah, easily done. The question is: Do people mind? | 20:14 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Should the bots have operator / voice status here? | 20:15 |
| blogan | xgerman: yes i could do that, but that requires me to you know, do something | 20:15 |
| xgerman | fair... | 20:15 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Want me to send you a calendar invite? | 20:15 |
| dougwig | sbalukoff: they already have those rights, they just don't sit with them active. | 20:15 |
| blogan | lol im being dumb | 20:15 |
| sbalukoff | (I have one to remind me to update the agenda. XD ) | 20:15 |
| blogan | no i can set my own, its fine | 20:15 |
| blogan | im joking about me being helpless, i just wasn't thinking | 20:16 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, so again, question: Is it useful for me to send something to the mailing list reminding people of the agenda, the meeting time and location, and the stand-up etherpad? | 20:16 |
| ctracey_ | hola folks | 20:16 |
| sbalukoff | Because I absolutely could do that. :) | 20:16 |
| sbalukoff | Howdy Craig! | 20:16 |
| ctracey_ | sbalukoff: yes | 20:16 |
| blogan | i think it is useful, but once more and more people get involved it won't scale very well | 20:16 |
| xgerman | yes, agenda to mailing list is good | 20:17 |
| blogan | i mean the etherpad in general | 20:17 |
| sbalukoff | Good enough! The rest of you will just have to put up with my spam. (as usual) | 20:17 |
| blogan | not the ML | 20:17 |
| ctracey_ | well the agenda should be posted | 20:17 |
| Vorrtex__ | I did a general update for the weekly standup page, sorry about that sbalukoff. I'll draw my attention to that for before the future meetings | 20:17 |
| blogan | yeah agenda should be posted, and the etherpad can be in that same post | 20:17 |
| sbalukoff | #action sbalukoff to send weekly reminders to ML about agenda, meeting time + location, and stand-up etherpad | 20:17 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Yes, I intend to do this in a single e-mail. | 20:17 |
| ctracey_ | yes - a standing post in the meeting invite is fine. | 20:17 |
| sbalukoff | Ok! | 20:18 |
| sbalukoff | So, one thing I would like to see for next week is for everyone interested in contributing to have a look through the blueprints and either ask questions (here, in the ML, or in next week's IRC meeting) about what is unclear, what is to ambiguous, or anything else that's a subtle blocker for getting started helping. :) | 20:19 |
| sbalukoff | I'm totally going to make an action item out of that. | 20:20 |
| xgerman | I think once we hav more specs it might be easier for people to jump in | 20:20 |
| * dougwig thinks that sbalukoff just discovered the #action tag. | 20:20 | |
| xgerman | last week was vote-tag | 20:20 |
| xgerman | now it's action - whoc knows what's next | 20:20 |
| sbalukoff | #action everyone to look through blueprints, help flesh out and/or come to IRC, ML or meeting with questions. | 20:20 |
| sbalukoff | Next week it'll all be about the #undo tag. | 20:21 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, on this note, does anyone have anything else they'd like to ask about this topic before we switch to open discussion? | 20:21 |
| johnsom_ | crikets... | 20:22 |
| sbalukoff | I'll take that as a 'no' | 20:22 |
| sbalukoff | #topic Open Discussion | 20:22 |
| * Vorrtex__ likes these short and to-the-point meetings | 20:23 | |
| dougwig | question: are we going to move these meetings to the openstack meeting channels? | 20:23 |
| sbalukoff | Anyone have anything they'd like to bring up before the group? (Otherwise, we might as well end early and let people get back to, you know, doing actual work.) | 20:23 |
| blogan | good question | 20:23 |
| blogan | we should move to the meeting channels | 20:23 |
| blogan | i have no idea what that process is though | 20:23 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: I've yet to see whether there's an opening during this time slot. | 20:23 |
| dougwig | i think you just reserve a slot in the wiki and go for it. | 20:23 |
| sbalukoff | I'm happy to do that, so long as we can get this same slot (or something very near it). | 20:24 |
| sbalukoff | (Mid week, and not forcing me to get up at 5:00am makes for a slightly less cranky sbalukoff) | 20:24 |
| blogan | looks like openstack-meeting-3 would be available at this time | 20:25 |
| sbalukoff | #action sbalukoff to look into / move Octavia meeting to a standard openstack meeting channel. | 20:25 |
| blogan | just from a quick search | 20:25 |
| dougwig | i'd suggest that we do so, unless there are time conflicts. but see as all of my other openstack meetings are at horrendous hours, the mid-day blocks should be free. :) | 20:25 |
| Vorrtex__ | dougwig: aint that the truth | 20:25 |
| xgerman | or we start openstack-meeting4 | 20:25 |
| xgerman | ... | 20:25 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: That was my sardonic hope, as well. ;) | 20:25 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Isn't that what #openstack-lbaas is? ;) | 20:25 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, folks, anything else, or are we done for today? | 20:26 |
| xgerman | then we need tolerate other projects doing meetings in our channel | 20:26 |
| dougwig | i'm done. trevor, you got some -1 love. | 20:26 |
| Vorrtex__ | dougwig: thanks | 20:26 |
| blogan | sbalukoff, xgerman: name of the controller driver interface to push teh configs along | 20:26 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Ooh! Good one. | 20:26 |
| Vorrtex__ | dougwig: if you reviewed the repository review then I know its broken | 20:26 |
| blogan | is it a WIP? | 20:27 |
| Vorrtex__ | blogan: last I checked yeah | 20:27 |
| sbalukoff | #topic "Discussion" about what to name class that is the controller<->driver interface. | 20:27 |
| blogan | naming! yay! | 20:27 |
| xgerman | driver means the driver which controls LBs on an Amphora | 20:27 |
| dougwig | what's the name for a roman vomitorium? | 20:27 |
| sbalukoff | I was really tempted to make the topic "Weekly holy war" | 20:27 |
| dougwig | or a roman bottle opening? | 20:28 |
| dougwig | jk. | 20:28 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Haha! | 20:28 |
| blogan | so the current name suggested is AmphoraeDriver, but that to me seounds like its responsible for spinning up and down Amphorae | 20:28 |
| blogan | wherease SoftwareLoadBalancerDriver is more specific, but still generic enough (though the name is a bit dumb I know) | 20:28 |
| *** ptoohill-oo has quit IRC | 20:28 | |
| dougwig | ControllerDriver. AmphoraConfigDriver. AmphoraMetaDriver. | 20:29 |
| dougwig | (just throwing stuff out) | 20:29 |
| sbalukoff | ControllerDriverInterface | 20:29 |
| sbalukoff | That's the most literal term I can think of. | 20:29 |
| Vorrtex__ | while we're throwing stuff out, how about nuking the term amphora? | 20:29 |
| Vorrtex__ | lulz jp | 20:29 |
| blogan | is there also going to be a driver interface that is responsible for amphora lifecycle mangement? | 20:29 |
| sbalukoff | Vorrtex__: Don't make me send the phone spiders after you. | 20:30 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: There needs to be something like that, yes. | 20:30 |
| blogan | and that will live in the controller as well then? | 20:30 |
| sbalukoff | Well, we've talked (briefly) about having an abstract interface to Nova | 20:31 |
| blogan | so doesn't AmphoraeDriver seem more appropirate for that | 20:31 |
| sbalukoff | It seems to me it would be there, and probably not in the thing German is working on. | 20:31 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Maybe AmphoraeManager | 20:31 |
| xgerman | yeah, ironically blogan suggested that name | 20:31 |
| blogan | xgerman: shhh | 20:31 |
| blogan | no one needs to know that | 20:31 |
| xgerman | lol | 20:31 |
| dougwig | Manager gets overloaded a lot, between python context managers and openstack in general. | 20:32 |
| blogan | AmphoraeManager is still the same problem | 20:32 |
| blogan | noo dougwig, no more overloaded complaints | 20:32 |
| xgerman | I guess we should pick a few and vote | 20:32 |
| xgerman | exercise the #vote tag | 20:32 |
| sbalukoff | I think some of the trepidation here is that there's probably some confusion about the responsibilities of each component. | 20:33 |
| blogan | ill be fine with AmphoraDriver, i don't want to get into a long drawn out discussion and vote | 20:33 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: +1 | 20:33 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, so! | 20:33 |
| Vorrtex__ | but driver is overloaded. | 20:33 |
| * sbalukoff sends the phone spiders after Vorrtex__ | 20:33 | |
| * Vorrtex__ laughs as his friends return to his side | 20:34 | |
| sbalukoff | Ok, so! | 20:34 |
| dlundquist | I think it would be easier if someone put forward a high level architecture with their best names and then we reviewed it, otherwise we can't decide if the name fits better somewhere else. | 20:34 |
| xgerman | then lets name it chauffeur | 20:34 |
| sbalukoff | Any other suggestions for a name here? | 20:34 |
| sbalukoff | I'm about to compile a list and call a vote. | 20:34 |
| Vorrtex__ | xgerman: how about alfred, or jarvis. | 20:34 |
| blogan | AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:34 |
| sbalukoff | So we don't have to spend too much time on this. | 20:34 |
| sballe_ | blogan, +1 | 20:34 |
| xgerman | +1 | 20:34 |
| xgerman | AmphoraLoadBalancersDrivers to illustrate the M to N | 20:35 |
| Vorrtex__ | xgerman: I thought we went 1:M LB:amphora? | 20:35 |
| blogan | wouldn't it be Amphorae? | 20:35 |
| xgerman | correct and Vortex_ sadly that didn't get ratified | 20:36 |
| blogan | anyway, sorry for brining up yet another naming issue | 20:36 |
| Vorrtex__ | So I should undo that change in the models then? | 20:36 |
| blogan | i thought we agreed to go wtih 1:M LB:amphora at first | 20:36 |
| Vorrtex__ | Yeah, same | 20:36 |
| xgerman | I thought dougwig threw a rench | 20:37 |
| xgerman | wrench | 20:37 |
| xgerman | and we left it M to N? | 20:37 |
| blogan | well he thinks it should be left up to the drivers | 20:37 |
| Vorrtex__ | I didn't see that xgerman, but I could have missed it | 20:37 |
| sbalukoff | #vote What should we call the class that is the controller-driver interface? AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver AmphoraDriver ControllerDriver AmphoraConfigDriver AmphoraMetaDriver ControllerDriverInterface AmphoraeManager | 20:37 |
| sbalukoff | Let's see if the voting system barfs over that. | 20:38 |
| blogan | is it active now? | 20:38 |
| blogan | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:38 |
| sbalukoff | Dammit no.. | 20:38 |
| johnsom_ | It doesn't look like it fired off the vote | 20:38 |
| Vorrtex__ | I thought it was "#start-vote" or something like that | 20:38 |
| sbalukoff | Sorry... just a sec. | 20:38 |
| blogan | start-vote | 20:38 |
| sbalukoff | #startvote What should we call the class that is the controller-driver interface? AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver AmphoraDriver ControllerDriver AmphoraConfigDriver AmphoraMetaDriver ControllerDriverInterface AmphoraeManager | 20:38 |
| openstack | Begin voting on: What should we call the class that is the controller-driver interface? Valid vote options are AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver, AmphoraDriver, ControllerDriver, AmphoraConfigDriver, AmphoraMetaDriver, ControllerDriverInterface, AmphoraeManager. | 20:38 |
| openstack | Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. | 20:38 |
| blogan | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:38 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, NOW vote | 20:38 |
| xgerman | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:39 |
| sballe_ | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:39 |
| sbalukoff | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:39 |
| sbalukoff | I sense a trend. | 20:39 |
| blogan | lol didn't need a vote | 20:39 |
| Vorrtex__ | #vote AmphoraeManager | 20:39 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: But now it'll be official. | 20:39 |
| johnsom_ | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:39 |
| blogan | i think we just like the vote sript | 20:39 |
| * Vorrtex__ really likes using overloaded terms that still make sense | 20:39 | |
| jwarendt | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:39 |
| ajmiller_ | #vote AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver | 20:40 |
| sbalukoff | 60 seconds until voting is ended... | 20:40 |
| sbalukoff | #endvote | 20:41 |
| openstack | Voted on "What should we call the class that is the controller-driver interface?" Results are | 20:41 |
| openstack | AmphoraeManager (1): Vorrtex__ | 20:41 |
| openstack | AmphoraLoadBalancerDriver (7): xgerman, jwarendt, sbalukoff, ajmiller_, johnsom_, blogan, sballe_ | 20:41 |
| sbalukoff | Ok! | 20:41 |
| sbalukoff | handy. | 20:41 |
| xgerman | runaway victory | 20:41 |
| sbalukoff | Anyone have anything else to bring before the group? | 20:41 |
| dougwig | Lost network. :) | 20:41 |
| Vorrtex__ | dougwig: blogan spoke for you a few times | 20:41 |
| Vorrtex__ | just sayin | 20:41 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: keeping the M:N table structure for LB:Amphora | 20:41 |
| Vorrtex__ | yeah, good call blogan | 20:41 |
| xgerman | +1 | 20:42 |
| sbalukoff | #topic voting on M:N table structure for LB:Amphora | 20:42 |
| blogan | if it is indeed left to the driver to decide, then we should just keep the M:N, but w can't put in unique constraints either to enforce 1:M | 20:42 |
| sbalukoff | Anyone want to summarize the arguments for either side? | 20:42 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: And therefore the code will have to deal with M:N, even if the driver uses 1:N | 20:43 |
| blogan | yes | 20:43 |
| johnsom_ | sbalukoff you are good with definitions, should we review what an "LB" is and how it is different than a "Amphora" just so we are all on the same page? | 20:43 |
| xgerman | sbalukoff and I agreed on 1:N | 20:43 |
| *** sbfox has joined #openstack-lbaas | 20:43 | |
| sbalukoff | johnsom_: Ok, so "LB" is load balancer as it came to be understood in the Neutron LBaaS project... | 20:43 |
| sbalukoff | Speaking of which... | 20:43 |
| Vorrtex__ | xgerman: blogan and I also agree on that | 20:43 |
| blogan | xgerman: we agreed to do that at first, but we can still have the table structure set up to be M:N to not paint oursevles in a corner to not allow it in the future or other drivers to do it | 20:44 |
| sbalukoff | #action sbalukoff to start dictionary / glossary of terms for Octavia project. | 20:44 |
| xgerman | +1 | 20:44 |
| sbalukoff | I keep forgetting to do that. :P | 20:44 |
| johnsom_ | +1 | 20:44 |
| blogan | that way its up to the driver to decide whether its M:N or 1:M | 20:44 |
| masteinhauser | sbalukoff: You defined like 20 on-the-fly when we were on the phone... | 20:44 |
| sbalukoff | That's because I talk too quickly and interminably. :) | 20:45 |
| blogan | anyone hve a strong opinion on whether we allow M:N LB:Amphora table structure (but still aim at 1:M LB:Amphora for the driver we actually implement)? | 20:46 |
| sbalukoff | To further clarify what "LB" means: It's essentially the same thing as a "VIP" in other load balancing terminology (ie. everywhere outside of Neutron LBaaS), with the exception that a load balancer *might* have more than on IP address associated with it in the future. | 20:46 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: So this question, to me, is more about whether we ever want to allow more than one load balancer per amphora. (ie. whether there are practical, technical, or business needs to allow for this.) | 20:47 |
| *** busterswt has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
| sbalukoff | If we intend to allow 3rd party vendors to have more freedom in how they implement their solutions, we need M:N, IMO. | 20:48 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: true, and if someone really needs it then we shouldn't not allow it | 20:48 |
| masteinhauser | M:N seems to make sense in the case when you may be using LVS or other Direct Routing style load balancers. | 20:48 |
| sbalukoff | But... I dunno. Maybe we don't want Octavia to allow that. :/ | 20:48 |
| blogan | xgerman: thoughts? | 20:48 |
| xgerman | well, my thought was for a software LB we can always adjust the size of the vm -- so if you need to LB's just spin up tow tiny vms | 20:49 |
| xgerman | so one lb per amphora is sufficient and you tune with nova | 20:49 |
| blogan | is there another case for M:N other than trying to save space/resources by putting many LBs/Listeners on an amphora? | 20:50 |
| sbalukoff | I could imagine a 3rd party solution where a vendor makes a "big" load balancer appliance and allows "virtual load balancers" to be created on it in some fashion. This model doesn't actually break with 1:N, per se... | 20:50 |
| xgerman | also since we have migrations how diffiuclt is it to geo from 1:N to M:N? | 20:50 |
| sbalukoff | It's also a question of "do we really need to allow for colocation? | 20:50 |
| sbalukoff | Apolocation is necessary to fulfill HA requirements, in any case. | 20:51 |
| sbalukoff | But I'm having a hard time coming up with a solid case for LB colocation. | 20:51 |
| Vorrtex__ | sbalukoff: colocation I thought was being handled inside neutron or did I miss a conversation there as well o_0 | 20:51 |
| blogan | xgerman: it really shouldn't be too difficult, code will have to changed as well probably | 20:51 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: It's not just migrations, per se... it's also a bunch of places in the code where people, by that time, might have assumed 1:M and aren't prepared to deal with M:N | 20:51 |
| xgerman | yeah, so the reason would need to be really compelling by then :-) | 20:52 |
| sbalukoff | Vorrtex__: There was some talk of it being handled in Nova, IIRC... but we'll still need a logical representation in Octavia in any case, I think. | 20:52 |
| xgerman | yeah, so the lifecycle driver can tell nova what to do | 20:53 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Yes. And again, I'm having trouble coming up with a compelling justification. | 20:53 |
| Vorrtex__ | I see, thanks sbalukoff, I thought we had talked about it at some point there | 20:53 |
| blogan | dougwig: do you have any thoughts on this? | 20:53 |
| sbalukoff | Can anyone here think of a good reason why we would need colocation? | 20:53 |
| xgerman | colocation of two LBs on the same vm -- NOT colocation of two vms conatining LBs on the same host | 20:53 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Yes, exactly. Thanks for the clarification. | 20:54 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: define colocation and apolocation in yoru gloassary too | 20:54 |
| xgerman | +1 | 20:54 |
| blogan | i'm colocated with everyone right now, on earth | 20:54 |
| sbalukoff | I can think of one potentially compelling reason not to allow colocation: It makes our system less flexible. | 20:54 |
| sbalukoff | (Because users would then, effectively, be able to dictate where certain cloud resources get placed.) | 20:55 |
| xgerman | it's always more difficult to take the right thing away then to add things | 20:55 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Another compelling reason. | 20:55 |
| *** sballe has joined #openstack-lbaas | 20:55 | |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Are you still here? | 20:55 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: I would like to get your perspective on this because I think you're probably the person most in favor of M:N here. | 20:56 |
| sbalukoff | So, if dougwig has lost connectivity, I will forego the vote until next week. | 20:57 |
| xgerman | but we need to know | 20:57 |
| xgerman | well, I can assume the 1:N case in the interface | 20:57 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Let's assume 1:N for now, then, unless dougwig can give us a compelling reason to do M:N that outweighs the two reasons we've come up with for not to allow colocation. | 20:58 |
| sbalukoff | Ok! | 20:58 |
| sbalukoff | We have about 2 minutes left. | 20:58 |
| xgerman | Deal! | 20:58 |
| sbalukoff | Anything else? | 20:58 |
| xgerman | blogan? | 20:58 |
| blogan | i have nothing else | 20:58 |
| blogan | but yeah thats fine by me | 20:58 |
| sbalukoff | Thanks for coming y'all! | 20:59 |
| sballe | bye | 20:59 |
| xgerman | bye | 20:59 |
| sbalukoff | #endmeeting | 20:59 |
| openstack | Meeting ended Wed Sep 17 20:59:24 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 20:59 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/octavia/2014/octavia.2014-09-17-20.00.html | 20:59 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/octavia/2014/octavia.2014-09-17-20.00.txt | 20:59 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/octavia/2014/octavia.2014-09-17-20.00.log.html | 20:59 |
| rm_work | lol | 20:59 |
| ajmiller_ | bye | 20:59 |
| rm_work | managed to completely miss the meeting | 20:59 |
| *** sballe_ has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| rm_work | forgot it was happening until literally JUST NOW | 20:59 |
| rm_work | T_T | 20:59 |
| sbalukoff | rm_work: I was tempted, too! ;) | 20:59 |
| crc32 | heh | 21:00 |
| rm_work | Vorrtex__: i totally was with you on AmphoraeManager :P | 21:00 |
| rm_work | ah well, still woulda been 2 vs lots | 21:00 |
| Vorrtex__ | exactly | 21:00 |
| Vorrtex__ | :D | 21:00 |
| rm_work | AmphoraeManager matches the code I'm working on presently in Barbican :P | 21:00 |
| rm_work | uhh | 21:01 |
| blogan | rm_work: is it ContainerManager? | 21:01 |
| rm_work | so I assume Vorrtex__ will provide me with nice notes :P | 21:01 |
| rm_work | yes | 21:01 |
| sbalukoff | rm_work: Make yourself a calendar reminder! | 21:01 |
| dougwig | go with ContextManager | 21:01 |
| sbalukoff | ThingyDriver | 21:02 |
| *** jwarendt has quit IRC | 21:02 | |
| rm_work | alright blogan just explained what it does and i totally was misdirected by the name AmphoraeManager, so i retract my non-vote :P | 21:02 |
| *** tmc3inphilly has quit IRC | 21:02 | |
| *** ptoohill has joined #openstack-lbaas | 21:02 | |
| *** sbfox has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
| sbalukoff | rm_work: Haha! Does that mean blogan has returned from lunching on tears of disappointment | 21:03 |
| sbalukoff | ? | 21:03 |
| blogan | i was lunching on them throughout the entire meeting | 21:04 |
| blogan | tasted like diappointment, but what else would you expect coming from rm_work | 21:04 |
| dougwig | why are you licking rm_work's face? | 21:06 |
| dougwig | maybe that's why he's crying? | 21:06 |
| Vorrtex__ | dougwig: its a passionate, but vicious circle | 21:07 |
| *** ajmiller_ has quit IRC | 21:07 | |
| *** Vorrtex__ has quit IRC | 21:14 | |
| *** crc32 has quit IRC | 21:19 | |
| *** crc32 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 21:19 | |
| *** dlundquist has left #openstack-lbaas | 21:27 | |
| rm_work | lol | 21:28 |
| rm_work | yeah my calendar went off ~15m before and I guess I silenced it T_T | 21:28 |
| *** crc32 has quit IRC | 21:29 | |
| *** crc32 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 21:30 | |
| *** jroyall has quit IRC | 21:46 | |
| *** barclaac|2 has joined #openstack-lbaas | 21:57 | |
| *** barclaac has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| xgerman | blogan there was another thing I wanted to talk with you about regarding data model | 22:11 |
| *** VijayB_ has quit IRC | 22:17 | |
| openstackgerrit | German Eichberger proposed a change to stackforge/octavia: Second verison of amphora driver spec: New name, blongans and sbalukoffs, comments, hopefully pep8 https://review.openstack.org/121694 | 22:17 |
| *** pck has quit IRC | 22:24 | |
| *** jorgem has quit IRC | 22:25 | |
| *** pck has joined #openstack-lbaas | 22:33 | |
| *** jroyall has joined #openstack-lbaas | 22:41 | |
| *** VijayB_ has joined #openstack-lbaas | 22:45 | |
| *** enikanorov has quit IRC | 22:51 | |
| blogan | xgerman: shoot | 23:00 |
| blogan | if you're still around | 23:00 |
| *** crc32 has quit IRC | 23:00 | |
| xgerman | well, I am in another meeting will be in 20 | 23:00 |
| blogan | xgerman: okay | 23:00 |
| blogan | xgerman: if I leave i'll still get your message when I get back | 23:00 |
| xgerman | ;-) | 23:01 |
| *** jorgem has joined #openstack-lbaas | 23:13 | |
| xgerman | blogan: so my question was the following: We are storing the ceilometer data (ala bytes_in, out, # of connections) in the mysql database -- but we will also be sending that data to ceilometer | 23:42 |
| blogan | oaky | 23:42 |
| blogan | are you asking why do both? | 23:43 |
| xgerman | those will be pretty busy table so I am wondering if we should just not have them since we duplicate information from ceilometer | 23:43 |
| xgerman | more why not dicth them :-) | 23:43 |
| *** sballe has quit IRC | 23:43 | |
| blogan | thats definitely something we should discuss more and i need to get more answers in RAX's case because we don't use ceilometer | 23:44 |
| xgerman | ok, that's a good reson :-) | 23:44 |
| blogan | but I think if we just made the mechanism to push stats a clean interface, then we will be able to write our own | 23:44 |
| xgerman | yeah, I was thinking just pusjing them to ceilometer is better for the asynchronous UDP listener worker | 23:45 |
| blogan | currently we do store that information in our tables as well, and it is quite a busy table, but then we also push it to a ceilometer type of service, though its not ceilometer | 23:45 |
| blogan | i'd like to get around having to store it in multiple places, but then again, we do use those tables whenever we need to double check some numbers that might look odd | 23:47 |
| xgerman | yeah, the only reason we might store it ourself is to have a "buffer" when ceilometer is down | 23:47 |
| blogan | lol | 23:47 |
| blogan | yes that bufer has come in handy with ours | 23:47 |
| xgerman | well, we move it to an RabbitMQ at HP which ceilometer reads | 23:48 |
| xgerman | so the queue is the buffer | 23:48 |
| dougwig | do we have anything to meet about tomorrow? | 23:48 |
| xgerman | incubator? | 23:49 |
| blogan | the lbaas incubator meeting | 23:49 |
| dougwig | xgerman: "it should land this week." | 23:49 |
| dougwig | jk | 23:49 |
| dougwig | i'll put it on the agenda. | 23:49 |
| xgerman | well, let's hear that tomorrow from the horses mouth :-) | 23:49 |
| blogan | xgerman: what if ceilometer goes down for an extended period? would the queue have an issue with that? | 23:49 |
| xgerman | well, in pour case it holds data for a few days | 23:50 |
| xgerman | (we got in trouble once for writing into the wrong queue) | 23:51 |
| blogan | i am worried that if our ceilometer-like service goes down, then we'd lose data | 23:53 |
| blogan | how bout we keep the tables for now and if we don't need them, then we can remove them | 23:54 |
| xgerman | sounds good. Also queues are a bit better for that task then tables... | 23:55 |
| blogan | we can use databases as queues! | 23:55 |
| dougwig | ok, agenda posted | 23:55 |
| blogan | but yeah you're right | 23:55 |
| dougwig | at the risk of opening a can of worms, does zaqar have a way to feed ceilometer? | 23:56 |
| xgerman | yeah, I am a bit worried about locking and the asynchronous nature of the UDP listener... | 23:56 |
| xgerman | well, we have a ton of Rabbit Queues alreday at HP so not sure how well zaquar integrates | 23:58 |
| *** mlavalle has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!