| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 02:11 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 02:18 | |
| *** pgreg has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 04:48 | |
| *** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 06:54 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 09:09 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 09:53 | |
| *** sdague has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 10:27 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 11:38 | |
| *** flaper87 has quit IRC | 11:48 | |
| *** flaper87 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 11:51 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 12:23 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 12:56 | |
| *** ninag has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:11 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 13:23 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:25 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 13:25 | |
| *** annegent_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:52 | |
| *** annegent_ has quit IRC | 13:52 | |
| *** annegent_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:53 | |
| *** annegent_ has quit IRC | 14:18 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:31 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:38 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:42 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 14:46 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:47 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:53 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 14:59 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:11 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 15:17 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:18 | |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: Gerrit is restarting on review.openstack.org in an attempt to address an issue reading an object from the ec2-api repository | 15:21 | |
| *** pgreg_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:25 | |
| *** annegent_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:28 | |
| *** pgreg has quit IRC | 15:28 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 15:31 | |
| *** pgreg_ has quit IRC | 15:38 | |
| *** pgreg has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:38 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 15:44 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:49 | |
| *** annegent_ has quit IRC | 15:51 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:54 | |
| *** pgreg has quit IRC | 15:56 | |
| *** askb has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:57 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 16:04 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 16:40 | |
| *** david-lyle_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:44 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 16:44 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:48 | |
| *** david-lyle_ has quit IRC | 16:49 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:52 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 17:07 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 17:24 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 17:25 | |
| *** askb has quit IRC | 18:00 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 18:04 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 18:06 | |
| *** david-lyle_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:12 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 18:14 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:33 | |
| *** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:34 | |
| *** sdake_ has quit IRC | 18:35 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 18:37 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:39 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 18:44 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:48 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:02 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:13 | |
| *** angdraug has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:22 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 19:27 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:33 | |
| *** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:36 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 19:38 | |
| *** sheel has quit IRC | 19:57 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 20:03 | |
| *** sdake_ has quit IRC | 20:06 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 20:25 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 20:29 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 20:29 | |
| *** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 20:43 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 20:43 | |
| *** vgridnev has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 20:49 | |
| vilobhmm11 | #startmeeting quotas-wg | 21:00 |
|---|---|---|
| openstack | Meeting started Mon Mar 28 21:00:20 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is vilobhmm11. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: quotas-wg)" | 21:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'quotas_wg' | 21:00 |
| vilobhmm11 | hi all | 21:00 |
| mc_nair | hey | 21:02 |
| vilobhmm11 | hi mc_nair | 21:03 |
| vilobhmm11 | lets wait few min for others to join | 21:03 |
| ninag | hi | 21:03 |
| nikhil | Courtesy quotas-wg meeting reminder: nikhil, vilobhmm, DuncanT, mc_nair, ninag | 21:03 |
| nikhil | amrith ^ | 21:03 |
| vilobhmm11 | hi ninag, nikhil | 21:03 |
| nikhil | hey vilobhmm11 | 21:04 |
| DuncanT | Hi | 21:04 |
| vilobhmm11 | hello DuncanT | 21:04 |
| vilobhmm11 | all lets start then | 21:04 |
| nikhil | amrith may join in a min | 21:04 |
| vilobhmm11 | ok | 21:04 |
| *** amrith has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 21:05 | |
| amrith | sorry, hadn't connected to this ... | 21:05 |
| *** rockyg has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 21:05 | |
| nikhil | do we have a agenda today vilobhmm11 or should I quickly look up items from last mtg? | 21:05 |
| nikhil | amrith: np, we've the full house now | 21:05 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : i can go over the latest changes to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284454/7 | 21:05 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: ^ | 21:05 |
| vilobhmm11 | but you can start | 21:05 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: please go ahead, actually that was the first item from that list :) | 21:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | from what happened in past meeting; since i was nto well last week could not join | 21:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | ok :) | 21:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | so we have been getting good feedback on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284454/7/specs/delimiter-cross-project-quota-enforcement.rst | 21:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | before making any further changes wanted to give a bigger picture of what is the proposed approach here | 21:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | so if we check https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284454/7/specs/delimiter-cross-project-quota-enforcement.rst line # 116 | 21:07 |
| vilobhmm11 | any project who wan;ts to consume quota will need to create an instance of the quota engine | 21:07 |
| vilobhmm11 | and quota engine will provide simple api's like | 21:08 |
| vilobhmm11 | #1. check_quota ( Query API) | 21:08 |
| vilobhmm11 | #2. assign_quota (Update API | 21:08 |
| vilobhmm11 | which internally will be implemented by the quota engine in atransaction safe manner | 21:09 |
| vilobhmm11 | so the quota engine will need the name of the project to get intialized | 21:09 |
| vilobhmm11 | please note that the data for quotas will still be kept with the respective projects and the quota entity(delimiter) won't like to maintain it [Thats what I have proposed here; we can discuss more if people don;t agree] | 21:10 |
| vilobhmm11 | advantages while doing so :- | 21:10 |
| vilobhmm11 | #. delimiter does not need to worry about data migration | 21:11 |
| vilobhmm11 | #. respective projects store quota data locally | 21:11 |
| vilobhmm11 | what delimiter provides is a common set of models that can be operated upon in a transaction safe manner | 21:11 |
| DuncanT | I've been rather worried by the lack of reservations, and people saying we don't need them - the more I look at the cinder code, the more I think we do need them | 21:12 |
| nikhil | I like this idea | 21:12 |
| vilobhmm11 | better way to put is *common set of models which can be used to enforce quotas in a transaction safe manner* | 21:12 |
| vilobhmm11 | DuncanT : we can get to that later ; first we should agree upon lib/service debate | 21:12 |
| amrith | will delimiter allow oversubscription? | 21:12 |
| vilobhmm11 | amrith : yes | 21:12 |
| amrith | vilobhmm11, will wait till we get there. | 21:13 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: do we have the third name for that oversubscription? | 21:13 |
| nikhil | :) | 21:13 |
| amrith | On the subject of service/library, I think we should stick with library | 21:13 |
| ninag | +1 on not having a quota service | 21:13 |
| vilobhmm11 | if you see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284454/7/specs/delimiter-cross-project-quota-enforcement.rst #75 we have a proposal there | 21:13 |
| nikhil | agreed on the library way | 21:13 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : not yet :P floating sounds ok but not to the mark | 21:13 |
| amrith | has anyone made a strong argument for service? | 21:14 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: ha! no worries, we will take what we've then | 21:14 |
| nikhil | amrith: there was one in the ML | 21:14 |
| vilobhmm11 | amrith : please go through http://osdir.com/ml/openstack-dev/2016-03/msg01582.html | 21:14 |
| vilobhmm11 | for details | 21:14 |
| nikhil | it has to do with the UX aspects of it | 21:14 |
| nikhil | Boris specifically | 21:14 |
| nikhil | also, PWG is building on user stories that indicate the req for UX and a service would help there | 21:15 |
| nikhil | but my proposal to PWG liaison for quotas and he agreed to it was: we start off small as lib and then may be in future cycles.. | 21:15 |
| amrith | is he (Boris) going to join here? | 21:15 |
| nikhil | we implement a service that will be able to proxy per project calls | 21:15 |
| nikhil | I did not get a ack from him indicating so | 21:16 |
| vilobhmm11 | +1 nikhil imho we can eventually go to a service (*if needed*) but for now i think its better to start as a lib as there are new set of problems to solve if its a service | 21:16 |
| nikhil | yeah, the biggest concern is about atomicity (and of course the upgrades too) | 21:17 |
| nikhil | amrith: but I think we'd get the folks who have strong inclination on this being service on the same page as the rest of WG | 21:17 |
| nikhil | preferably before the summit | 21:18 |
| vilobhmm11 | by being a lib we need not worry about data migration ; what we could focus on is transactional guarantees (which is of at most importance for something like quotas) and provide easy to use API for users | 21:18 |
| vilobhmm11 | like check_quota ; assign_quota | 21:18 |
| vilobhmm11 | and lets the quota engine do the magic underneath :) | 21:18 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: amrith: what do you think about updating the alternatives section of the spec to indicate service option and why the spec prefers lib? | 21:19 |
| vilobhmm11 | the logic to understand project heirarchies like non-hiearchical or hierarchical will be taken into consideration by delimiter | 21:20 |
| amrith | nikhil, I think that's a good alternative | 21:20 |
| amrith | I (personally) think the library option is a good start | 21:20 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : makes sense. I have an updated draft ready will push the changes for alternative section with that | 21:20 |
| amrith | but, wanted to make sure that the alternatives were also well spoken for. the ml seemed to be thin on that side. | 21:20 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil, ninag, mc_nair, amrith, DuncanT : So then looks like all of us are on same page and would be nice to start off with delimiter being a LIBRARY for now | 21:21 |
| vilobhmm11 | amrith : sure | 21:21 |
| nikhil | amrith: and I doubt if ML will be so far thorough :/ | 21:22 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: sounds like a good plan | 21:22 |
| amrith | understood. that makes sense | 21:22 |
| vilobhmm11 | with the focus of delimiter be on is transactional guarantees (which is of at most importance for something like quotas) and provide easy to use API for users and the logic to understand project heirarchies like non-hiearchical or hierarchical will be taken into consideration by delimiter | 21:23 |
| amrith | let's move ahed with the option of listing service as an alternative with reasons why not as you propose. | 21:23 |
| *** raildo is now known as raildo-afk | 21:23 | |
| nikhil | ++ | 21:24 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : thats it from my side; unless anyone has some specific questions about the spec would let you take it forward; | 21:24 |
| vilobhmm11 | cool we have an agreement :) | 21:24 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: I think we need to write that down as a mission statement on the repo that will be created ;) | 21:24 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : For sure :) | 21:25 |
| vilobhmm11 | will do | 21:25 |
| amrith | ++ | 21:26 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil, DuncanT : we can talk about reservations now ? | 21:27 |
| *** sdake_ is now known as sdake | 21:27 | |
| amrith | I have a question re: repo | 21:27 |
| vilobhmm11 | please go ahead | 21:27 |
| amrith | is this going to be a project unto itself, or a part of (say) oslo? | 21:27 |
| amrith | oslo.delimiter | 21:27 |
| amrith | as opposed to openstack/delimiter | 21:28 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: I've added a few agenda items for which we nee ~15mins https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/quotas-wg-meeting-agenda | 21:28 |
| vilobhmm11 | ok | 21:29 |
| nikhil | amrith: I'd a chat with dims on this and oslo doesn't want this as it's part. they have accomplished their objective of common code. the preference is for a separate independent repo | 21:29 |
| amrith | ok, thanks | 21:29 |
| amrith | project it is | 21:29 |
| nikhil | I'm afraid to call it a project but sure :) | 21:29 |
| nikhil | not all projects have a service (like infra) but it's a pretty common misunderstanding | 21:30 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: thoughts? | 21:30 |
| amrith | ok, not an issue (that isn't the biggest issue at this stage, I guess) | 21:30 |
| nikhil | (I was just carrying the older context into this discussion) | 21:31 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : you r right projects like tooz/taskflow | 21:31 |
| vilobhmm11 | started as independent projects and then got incubated into oslo | 21:31 |
| vilobhmm11 | tooz/taskflow are not services though | 21:31 |
| nikhil | amrith: sorry for being overly conservative. I am trying to get us unstuck from all possible roadblocks :) | 21:32 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: sounds good | 21:32 |
| amrith | nikhil, good course of action | 21:32 |
| vilobhmm11 | my thought is to start it simple and eventually grow by focussing on the core peice (providing transaction gurantess) | 21:32 |
| nikhil | ++ | 21:32 |
| thingee | or take UX team under the big tent which doesn't have deliverables | 21:33 |
| nikhil | :) | 21:33 |
| nikhil | now that thingee is here, may be we can get a quick vote on whether we should propose this (quota) topic for CPL meeting tomorrow? | 21:35 |
| vilobhmm11 | thingee : welcome ! nikhil : sure | 21:35 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: ninag: amrith: mc_nair: ^ | 21:35 |
| ninag | Sure | 21:36 |
| thingee | I think it's healthy to communicate back to the general team to make sure efforts are going a good direction. | 21:36 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: Let's take the silence as yes. | 21:36 |
| thingee | since not every project is represented in this meeting it seems | 21:36 |
| DuncanT | Yes from me | 21:36 |
| mc_nair | +1 | 21:36 |
| nikhil | thingee: ++ (I think it was merely a matter of when rather than if) | 21:37 |
| amrith | +1 | 21:37 |
| amrith | on the communicate to CPL tomorrow | 21:37 |
| thingee | also just like release liaisons, I'm going to send out an email for projects with new ptls to make sure cross-project spec liaisons are refreshed if necessary. | 21:37 |
| thingee | so it'll be good in case we have newcomers. | 21:37 |
| nikhil | thanks for the heads up, thingee. | 21:38 |
| vilobhmm11 | thingee : sure; thanks for heads up | 21:38 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: DuncanT: I won't interrupt with any more request until 5 mins before the mtg closing time. we can talk about reservations now if you all want. | 21:39 |
| nikhil | may be better to use # topic to indicate the flow | 21:39 |
| vilobhmm11 | also one more thing thingee, nikhil : we got a slot in the cross project design session https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-cross-project-sessions so something to look forward to | 21:39 |
| *** tjcocozz has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 21:39 | |
| vilobhmm11 | mc_nair, ninag, DuncanT, amrith : ^^ | 21:40 |
| amrith | yes, looking at etherpad | 21:40 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: yes, about that. Great idea, good proactive input and we'd discuss that in a few more details next monday. | 21:40 |
| DuncanT | The reservations things... | 21:40 |
| vilobhmm11 | DuncanT : you can explain us the problems with and without reservation ? | 21:40 |
| nikhil | #topic reservations | 21:41 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: you need to do that (only chairs can change topic) | 21:41 |
| DuncanT | So we use a reservation because we want to report quota-not-available and similar in the API | 21:41 |
| DuncanT | so we can give immediate feedback | 21:41 |
| vilobhmm11 | #reservation | 21:41 |
| DuncanT | but we only know if we've successfully used quota in the c-vol code | 21:41 |
| vilobhmm11 | #topic reservations | 21:41 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "reservations (Meeting topic: quotas-wg)" | 21:41 | |
| DuncanT | which is the other side of an rpc | 21:42 |
| DuncanT | and might fail, silently (crash, rabbit restart, etc) | 21:42 |
| DuncanT | reservations give us that right now | 21:42 |
| DuncanT | not sure how to keep those sematics withotu them | 21:42 |
| DuncanT | I've been meaning for ages to make reservations more verbose (include the volume id and the request id) for debugging and logging | 21:43 |
| DuncanT | Can anybody explain how to recover from silent failures without reservations? | 21:44 |
| vilobhmm11 | DuncanT : what if without doing #1. reservation #2. commit we did #1. commit directly (based on actual resource usage) and if that didnt work do a rollback….If we impose expire time with every quota commit made won't it be the same | 21:45 |
| DuncanT | vilobhmm11: you can't track individual commits though | 21:45 |
| vilobhmm11 | if silent failures happen the expire time will be triggered eventually | 21:46 |
| nikhil | yes and the issue on the ML raised was that a 2 phase commit is really hard to achieve | 21:46 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil, DuncanT : even if its done as part of a transaction ? | 21:46 |
| amrith | nikhil, I think the ML comment was questioning whether you want to hold a txn open for the time it takes for the underlying srevice to do it's thing | 21:46 |
| DuncanT | vilobhmm11: you can't do a transaction since it's very async | 21:47 |
| amrith | I have a proposal for how to address this without the long comments and txn's. | 21:47 |
| vilobhmm11 | DuncanT : i see | 21:47 |
| DuncanT | amrith: I'm all ears | 21:47 |
| amrith | as part of the 'reservation' process, if the library (delimiter) returned a token | 21:47 |
| amrith | and the token was one that would expire in a certain amount of time. | 21:47 |
| amrith | then if the service didn't finish up in time, the reservation expires | 21:47 |
| amrith | if it does fihins, it comes back and tells the library that reservation <number> completed. | 21:48 |
| amrith | the code flow would look like this | 21:48 |
| amrith | for <operation> get token | 21:48 |
| amrith | do operation | 21:48 |
| amrith | report that <operation> with <token> is done | 21:48 |
| amrith | in practice, the reservation would put things into an 'in-flight' table. | 21:48 |
| amrith | so if you have quotas | 21:49 |
| DuncanT | amrith: That works for us I think, as long as the quota is logically consumed for the time the token is live, yeah | 21:49 |
| amrith | you have committed quotas and inflight quotas | 21:49 |
| amrith | and then when you are asked to check for quota, you use committed quotas and inflight quotas along with overcommit to make your decision | 21:49 |
| amrith | when a completion is reported, you move from 'inflight' to 'committed' | 21:49 |
| amrith | periodically a janitor will throw away in-flight stuff (which is timestamped) so you can cleanup from time to time | 21:50 |
| DuncanT | Being able to hang some metadata off the token (resource id, request id) would be useful for debugging, but that sounds pretty sematically close to what we have, so it should be easy to work with | 21:50 |
| amrith | DuncanT, logically consumed modulo oversubscription, I think. | 21:50 |
| amrith | my interest (very personally) is that I'd like to have cross-project quotas | 21:51 |
| nikhil | amrith: that makes sense. I was trying to tie this together with Jay's message from yesterday.. | 21:51 |
| DuncanT | amrith: cross-project quotas? | 21:51 |
| amrith | I'm wondering how we fold that into the design for per-project-library based qutas. | 21:51 |
| amrith | DuncanT, yes. | 21:51 |
| amrith | consider this | 21:51 |
| amrith | Trove is a consumer of services from many core services | 21:51 |
| amrith | lets just look at cinder and nova | 21:51 |
| amrith | I'd like a reservation token for cinder and nova resources | 21:51 |
| amrith | and then be able at a later stage (say when trove is done with a database) to go to the quota mechanism and just say "the token you gave me for reservation XYZ (potentially months ago) is now done, free it up" | 21:52 |
| DuncanT | amrith: Got you. Not a guarantee the operation will work, but it at least solves the quota issues | 21:52 |
| amrith | so on some granularity (per database, per cluster, ...) I'd like to associate a resource token | 21:53 |
| DuncanT | amrith: You shouldn't need to do that, since the resource will actually exist to hold the quota though, right? | 21:53 |
| amrith | and use taht to free up the resources cleanly (in the quota context) | 21:53 |
| DuncanT | amrith: or do you want to speculatively hold quota for a month? That seems a bit odd | 21:53 |
| amrith | whether the actual resource will be provisioned successfully or freed successfully, quota's can't guarantee. | 21:53 |
| amrith | not speculatively | 21:53 |
| amrith | here's the workflow | 21:53 |
| amrith | user comes to Trove and says, give me a MongoDB cluster, 7 nodes, each with these amounts of disk | 21:54 |
| amrith | so config servers and query routers have little disk | 21:54 |
| amrith | data nodes have a lot of disk | 21:54 |
| amrith | we get a reservation token | 21:54 |
| amrith | then make reservations based on those tokens. | 21:54 |
| amrith | then we attempt to get the actual resources | 21:54 |
| amrith | if they succeed, I commit the reservations. | 21:55 |
| amrith | the token remains. | 21:55 |
| amrith | six months later, the cluster has to be expanded | 21:55 |
| DuncanT | That's not a good design in my view | 21:55 |
| amrith | we use the same token to extend it | 21:55 |
| DuncanT | Once you've created the resource, the quota token is meaningless | 21:55 |
| amrith | finally three years later, the cluster goes away, we should be able to free all resources based on that token | 21:55 |
| DuncanT | That's resource grouping, totally independent of quota | 21:55 |
| nikhil | ah, so your requirement is for ensuring that you can guarantee if a new cluster can be built or not and commit to that fact upfront? | 21:56 |
| nikhil | I think last few lines didn't indicate this | 21:56 |
| amrith | nikhil, that's one | 21:56 |
| DuncanT | Reusing the quota token makes no sense since you need to check and reserve more quota anyway | 21:56 |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 21:56 | |
| amrith | bug I want to use the token as a tracking mechanism for all resources held for a purpose. | 21:56 |
| DuncanT | Unless you are grabbing more quota than you plan on using immediately? | 21:56 |
| amrith | maybe that's the part that duncant is pointing out is bad. | 21:56 |
| DuncanT | I'd call that resource tagging or similar, and say it is entirely authoginal to quotas | 21:57 |
| amrith | ok | 21:57 |
| DuncanT | orthogonal, sorry | 21:57 |
| amrith | ok, that makes sense | 21:58 |
| vilobhmm11 | i think any service who plans to consume quota from IaaS layer will have this use case say for example Trove, Magnum, Heat | 21:58 |
| vilobhmm11 | we are running out of time | 21:58 |
| nikhil | yeah | 21:58 |
| vilobhmm11 | i think this topic need more discussion | 21:58 |
| vilobhmm11 | and thought | 21:58 |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 21:59 | |
| amrith | I see DuncanT's point, let me think some more about this and see if I can take the two apart | 21:59 |
| amrith | and make quota's and resource tagging independent. | 21:59 |
| vilobhmm11 | may be DuncanT, amrith would be great to start a ML thread on this and take communities opinion so that we have some direction | 21:59 |
| amrith | maybe we can table it for now | 21:59 |
| amrith | sure, we can do that ... | 21:59 |
| nikhil | ++ | 21:59 |
| amrith | I added something to the agenda :) | 22:00 |
| vilobhmm11 | #action : DuncanT, amrith to send ML thread and start discusssion regarding reservations | 22:00 |
| nikhil | yes, we'd amrith :) | 22:00 |
| vilobhmm11 | alrite folks thanks for attending have a great week | 22:00 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: let's run over for a couple more mins :) | 22:00 |
| DuncanT | Writing a really dump prototype ASAP would be good too, start trying to hack it into the cinder, nova, glance code, see what fits | 22:00 |
| amrith | before we go, could we talk about a time for next meeting? | 22:00 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: or we can discuss it outside of the meeting in the same channel | 22:00 |
| amrith | or is there another group that needs this channel? | 22:00 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil, amrith : lets discuss outside | 22:01 |
| DuncanT | Yes please talk about times, it is 1 am here! | 22:01 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: oops | 22:01 |
| DuncanT | What channel for discussions? | 22:01 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: have a good night | 22:01 |
| nikhil | same channel | 22:01 |
| nikhil | #endmeeting | 22:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 22:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Mon Mar 28 22:01:24 2016 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/quotas_wg/2016/quotas_wg.2016-03-28-21.00.html | 22:01 |
| DuncanT | nikhil: sleep is for the week | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/quotas_wg/2016/quotas_wg.2016-03-28-21.00.txt | 22:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/quotas_wg/2016/quotas_wg.2016-03-28-21.00.log.html | 22:01 |
| DuncanT | weak | 22:01 |
| DuncanT | one of those... | 22:01 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: ha :) | 22:01 |
| nikhil | amrith: we're only waiting on vilobhmm11 for the doodle input | 22:01 |
| amrith | ok, can we look at http://doodle.com/poll/2mgcuktgqzxaiscw | 22:02 |
| amrith | 11am UTC seems to be the winner | 22:02 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : cheking | 22:02 |
| DuncanT | That's early afternoon here, which is great | 22:02 |
| amrith | i assume that it is all TZ~UTC, correct nikhil? | 22:02 |
| nikhil | amrith: I wanted to reschedule it for this week but since vilobhmm11 is the one driving the spec, it wouldn't have made sense! | 22:03 |
| nikhil | amrith: no, it's EST | 22:03 |
| nikhil | you can change the TZ in doodle | 22:03 |
| amrith | ok, 11am EST works as well (for me) | 22:03 |
| amrith | I'm in EST :) | 22:03 |
| vilobhmm11 | 11 am ESt which is 8 am PST is too early for me | 22:04 |
| vilobhmm11 | does 1 am EST work for everyone ? | 22:04 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: hopefully you noticed the TZ. seems like your early afternoon comment indicates it | 22:04 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: just poll on the doodle :D | 22:04 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : doing it :P | 22:04 |
| amrith | well, he said early afternoon because I said TZ~UTC | 22:05 |
| nikhil | Tuesday seems like a good option | 22:05 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: we need to chat on my commitment time for this WG | 22:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : sure | 22:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : voted on the poll | 22:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | please check | 22:06 |
| DuncanT | I'm UTC+3 at the moment | 22:07 |
| amrith | don't see it | 22:07 |
| nikhil | me neither | 22:07 |
| vilobhmm11 | can you see it now | 22:07 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: oh wow | 22:07 |
| amrith | Tuesday at 1pm (Eastern)? | 22:08 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : I have a meeting to attend now but anything *starting or after* 1pm EST would work for me | 22:08 |
| vilobhmm11 | anyday is fine | 22:08 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: surely, let's catch up tomorrow. | 22:08 |
| nikhil | have a good one | 22:08 |
| vilobhmm11 | so you guys decide and let me know thanks everyone | 22:08 |
| amrith | ok, nikhil, I guess you've got answers ... | 22:08 |
| vilobhmm11 | sure | 22:08 |
| amrith | have a good one | 22:08 |
| nikhil | amrith: you got a preference on the day? | 22:08 |
| amrith | g'night DuncanT | 22:08 |
| amrith | Tuesday | 22:09 |
| amrith | or Thursday | 22:09 |
| nikhil | thanks | 22:09 |
| nikhil | tuesday it it, you said it first :P | 22:09 |
| amrith | ciao | 22:09 |
| amrith | got to run now | 22:09 |
| nikhil | cioa everyone | 22:09 |
| *** mc_nair has left #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:09 | |
| ninag | bye | 22:09 |
| *** ninag has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| nikhil | DuncanT: may be you | 22:10 |
| nikhil | re here may be no, I am going for tuesday unless last min objections? | 22:10 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: ^ :) | 22:10 |
| DuncanT | Tuesday is fine | 22:10 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: thanks! | 22:10 |
| DuncanT | Trying to figure what time 1pm eastern is though | 22:10 |
| nikhil | +7 | 22:11 |
| nikhil | for you | 22:11 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: it will be 8pm | 22:11 |
| DuncanT | Ah, that's ok | 22:11 |
| nikhil | cool | 22:12 |
| *** amrith is now known as _amrith_ | 22:21 | |
| *** rockyg has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:32 | |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 22:32 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:33 | |
| *** sdague has quit IRC | 22:53 | |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 22:54 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:54 | |
| *** david-lyle_ is now known as david-lyle | 22:57 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 22:59 | |
| *** vgridnev has quit IRC | 23:07 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 23:19 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 23:19 | |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 23:25 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 23:25 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 23:26 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!