| congnt | Hi everyone, why octavia use haproxy instead nginx? Any document about it? I want to research octavia. Thank you all! | 03:35 |
|---|---|---|
| johnsom | congnt: Better performance and no licensing issues. Nginx had licensing issues for features like session persistence, etc. | 03:37 |
| congnt | johnsom: Do we have any document about it? Compare performance, what features haproxy provide better than nginx, etc.. Thanks | 03:40 |
| johnsom | We have talked to the nginx team (years ago) but they didn’t seem to have an interest. | 03:40 |
| johnsom | congnt: no, we don’t like to get involved in those issues. I encourage you to review the license agreements for nginx. | 03:43 |
| congnt | johnsom: I will. Thank you so much for your support! | 03:44 |
| johnsom | Maybe they have changed under the new management, but it was a big issue when we started the Octavia project. | 03:44 |
| johnsom | congnt: Sure, no problem. Feel free to ask more questions here as you need. | 03:45 |
| *** yadnesh|away is now known as yadnesh | 04:10 | |
| gthiemonge | QG: Hi, in https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2010481 the quotas for the listeners look good (real == in_use), but yesterday, you put some different numbers there, was it a mistake? | 07:34 |
| QG | Hi gthiemonge, yep that was a mistake, i correct it and push a new output and a new version of the script | 09:22 |
| gthiemonge | QG: ok thanks | 09:23 |
| arddennis | gthiemonge: or anyone else. I've updated patch for multiple AZ support in octavia and it passed tests and is based on master https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/558962 Can you suggest future steps? I can extend doc article or extend testing. | 10:13 |
| arddennis | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/558962 | 10:13 |
| gthiemonge | arddennis: Hi, I think we need reviews now. Maybe we also need a tempest test to verify the feature | 10:15 |
| gthiemonge | arddennis: we have an open octavia-tesmpest-plugin patch that creates a LB in a specific AZ, maybe we can add a follow up patch that tests a A/S LB in multi-AZs: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia-tempest-plugin/+/695349 | 10:16 |
| arddennis | gthiemonge: checking 695349 I think it should be doable. I'll try to test and come up with the new patch for octavia-tempest-plugin based on 695349 (if I understood you correctly) | 10:21 |
| gthiemonge | arddennis: ok cool | 10:21 |
| *** yadnesh is now known as yadnesh|away | 12:39 | |
| opendevreview | Gregory Thiemonge proposed openstack/octavia master: Fix CreateVIPBasePort review function https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/868215 | 13:46 |
| opendevreview | Gregory Thiemonge proposed openstack/octavia master: Cleanup/Remove unused Tasks https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/868216 | 13:46 |
| opendevreview | Tom Weininger proposed openstack/octavia master: WIP remove python-neutronclient https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/866327 | 15:59 |
| skraynev | Hi. Folks, it's again me. Looks like I finally fix all issues on my deployment. However I spotted in logs, the SQL Warning: relationship 'L7Policy._tags' will copy column l7policy.id to column tags.resource_id, which conflicts with relationship(s): 'HealthMonitor._tags' .... is it expected? I could not see any specific changes in models code between yoga (on my deployment) and master branches . It looks like the root | 16:03 |
| skraynev | cause - new version of SQLAlchemy > 1.4.0 - where this message was added. | 16:03 |
| opendevreview | Tom Weininger proposed openstack/octavia master: WIP remove python-neutronclient https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/866327 | 16:09 |
| tweining | skraynev: I saw such messages too. we're currently working on making changes for sqlalchemy 2 in octavia. | 16:11 |
| skraynev | tweining: Nice! could you please add me to reviewer when it be ready? I just want to take a look or may be cherry-pick it to my env too | 16:13 |
| tweining | gthiemonge created some patches already https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:sqlalchemy2 | 16:14 |
| skraynev | tweining: impressive work size. I thought about 1 patch :) | 16:16 |
| gthiemonge | it covers many other changes in sqlalchemy2 | 16:17 |
| tweining | it's one chain of patches, so I guess you could sqash them into 1 patch if desired | 16:18 |
| tweining | but yeah, it seems complex | 16:19 |
| gthiemonge | I need to double-check if the "tags" warning is fixed there | 16:20 |
| skraynev | gthiemonge: I did not find such fix in open PRs. Maybe I missed it or maybe it's merged already | 16:27 |
| priteau | Hello. Anyone able to approve a trivial doc fix? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/867123 | 16:52 |
| *** oschwart_ is now known as oschwart | 16:56 | |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/octavia master: Fix typo in docs section title https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/867123 | 19:18 |
| spatel | johnsom Hi | 21:04 |
| johnsom | spatel Hi | 21:06 |
| spatel | I am following this doc to configured octavia with kolla - https://docs.openstack.org/kolla-ansible/latest/reference/networking/octavia.html | 21:06 |
| spatel | I am running OVN for networking | 21:07 |
| spatel | [ml2_type_vlan] | 21:08 |
| spatel | network_vlan_ranges = physnet2:2000:2033 | 21:08 |
| spatel | i have created - openstack network create lb-mgmt-net --provider-network-type vlan --provider-segment 2033 --provider-physical-network physnet2 | 21:08 |
| spatel | when i am trying to create LB i am getting error due to the OVN chassis bridge mapping physical networks ['physnet1'] not supporting physical network: physnet2 | 21:09 |
| johnsom | Sorry, but I don’t know how kolla sets up it’s networks. | 21:09 |
| spatel | I have this in ovn config - external_ids : {ovn-bridge-mappings="physnet1:br-ex", ovn-chassis-mac-mappings="physnet1:52:54:00:2f:c6:fd" | 21:10 |
| spatel | assuming i need to add physnet2 here. | 21:10 |
| spatel | Let me try and see.. | 21:11 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!