Hi, I checked on the testing. We haven' t seen performance related issues in the last 1 week however some of the listAPI calls seem to have perf issues. See this one - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1290
Automation is still blocked because of other failures so did not get benchmarks from that run. Thanks /sudha -----Original Message----- From: ASF IRC Services [mailto:asf...@wilderness.apache.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 9:48 AM To: Summary Recipient Subject: Summary of IRC meeting in #cloudstack-meeting, Wed Feb 27 17:05:23 2013 Members present: topcloud, chipc, ke4qqq, _ps, jburwell, vogxn, bhaisaab, likitha, sudhap ---------------- Meeting summary: ---------------- 1. Preface 2. 4.1.0 release updates (Active Feature Release) a. As of this morning, there are 9 open blocker bugs (3 of which are unassigned) and 14 open critical bugs (7 of which are unassigned) (chipc, 2) 3. 4.1.0 QA Status 4. 4.1.0 Doc Status 5. 4.1.0 Additional issues a. jburwell reporting that 4.1 management server is still consuming quite a bit more mem than 4.0 (chipc, 5) b. sudhap to check with QA to see what the 4.1 mgmt server memory looks like, vs previous versions (chipc, 5) 6. 4.1.0 QA Status (take 2) a. sudhap to help claify if blockers are blocking test execution or are release quality issues (chipc, 6) 7. 4.0.2 updates (Active Bug-Fix Release) 8. Master Branch discussions a. vogxn commented that getting the memory reduction fixes ported from 4.1 to master would be helpful (chipc, 8) 9. Infra discussions 10. Other? a. topcloud to raise setting the java compat options from within the poms for 4.1 on the list (chipc, 10) -------- Actions: -------- - sudhap to check with QA to see what the 4.1 mgmt server memory looks like, vs previous versions (chipc, 17:27:05) - sudhap to help claify if blockers are blocking test execution or are release quality issues (chipc, 17:30:02) - topcloud to raise setting the java compat options from within the poms for 4.1 on the list (chipc, 17:44:55) IRC log follows: # 1. Preface # 17:05:38 [chipc]: hi all - light attendance this week due to apache con NA 17:05:45 [chipc]: but here's the agenda: 17:06:00 [chipc]: 4.1.0 release updates (Active Feature Release) 17:06:00 [chipc]: 4.1.0 QA Status 17:06:00 [chipc]: 4.1.0 Doc Status 17:06:00 [chipc]: 4.1.0 Additional issues? (packaging is on my list) 17:06:00 [chipc]: 4.0.2 updates (Active Bug-Fix Release) 17:06:00 [chipc]: Master Branch discussions 17:06:03 [chipc]: Infra discussions 17:06:07 [chipc]: Other 17:06:09 [chipc]: so let's get started # 2. 4.1.0 release updates (Active Feature Release) # 17:06:22 [chipc]: 4.1.0 Schedule update / reminder: 17:06:30 [chipc]: 2013-02-28 is the end of the current phase, which includes the docs completion "target" and is when we shift to a limited update model for the release branch (i.e.: I'll be responsible for cherry-picking any changes) 17:06:37 [chipc]: #info As of this morning, there are 9 open blocker bugs (3 of which are unassigned) and 14 open critical bugs (7 of which are unassigned) 17:06:45 [chipc]: Last week, I went through all of the bugs, one at a time. I think there are too many this week... but I'll ask for updates on all of them in the tickets themselves 17:06:52 [chipc]: We *really* need people to volunteer for the unassigned bugs. 17:07:07 [chipc]: so that's where we stand with the bugs and the schedule 17:07:16 [chipc]: any thoughts / questions / concerns about it? 17:08:15 [ke4qqq]: ACTION wonders how we get folks to take ownership of these 17:08:22 [chipc]: asking on the list seems to be the only way 17:08:45 [bhaisaab]: yeah, encourage them to step up 17:08:45 [chipc]: I'll start asking about specific bugs during the course of the day today 17:09:00 [bhaisaab]: the vmware and storage related bugs are the worst 17:09:07 [chipc]: +1 17:09:37 [chipc]: ok, so I guess we'll try to shift to QA update 17:09:37 [bhaisaab]: and then we had console-proxy and paths related bugs, bug most of 'em are fixed now 17:09:39 [bhaisaab]: yes! # 3. 4.1.0 QA Status # 17:10:00 [chipc]: is there anyone from ctx QA here now? 17:10:02 [chipc]: and able to talk about status? 17:10:37 [jburwell]: chipc: I don't know about the QA status, but just getting the management server up and running has been a bear from the 4.1 branch ??? 17:11:00 [jburwell]: I have finally gotten it up again, but marvin just appears to hang when attempting to populate a configuration 17:11:02 [bhaisaab]: none I think, and I'm from ctx but I don't know what they are doing 17:11:08 [chipc]: indeed, and did you file bugs for issues you found? 17:11:16 [jburwell]: I have for the interactive password issue 17:11:22 [chipc]: bhaisaab: yeah, gotcha 17:11:23 [ke4qqq]: should we gate 17:11:23 [topcloud]: jburwell: is it related to the spring work? 17:11:37 [chipc]: ke4qqq: explain? 17:11:37 [jburwell]: I am just now experiencing the marvin hang 17:11:46 [jburwell]: haven't been able to characterize it yet 17:11:47 [topcloud]: jburwell: at what stage? 17:11:54 [topcloud]: compile? deploy? 17:12:07 [topcloud]: deploydb? 17:12:15 [bhaisaab]: jburwell: let me knwo I may be able to help 17:12:15 [jburwell]: topcloud: I have compiled and deployed the database and management server 17:12:17 [ke4qqq]: chipc: should we start gating stuff into 4.1 until we get it stabilized....the problems here have me wanting gerrit ;) 17:12:30 [jburwell]: marvin connects and is running 17:12:37 [topcloud]: ke4qqq: only now? 17:12:37 [bhaisaab]: ke4qqq: +1 me too :) 17:12:39 [jburwell]: but no reflection of work in the logs other than creation of the admin user 17:12:48 [jburwell]: no errors or info output 17:13:00 [jburwell]: in either vmops.log or api.log 17:13:00 [chipc]: ke4qqq: well, only a couple of days until we said we'd do that anyway 17:13:07 [bhaisaab]: jburwell: it gets sttuck 17:13:15 [bhaisaab]: ? 17:13:22 [jburwell]: bhaisaab: appears so 17:13:37 [topcloud]: we can see if we can help you get unstuck after this meeting. 17:13:37 [jburwell]: but I have no log or console output yet to characterize either the issue 17:13:39 [jburwell]: or where it is hanging 17:13:52 [jburwell]: topcloud: works for me 17:14:01 [ke4qqq]: topcloud: I like gerrit - worried about the effects - though the current state of things is just appalling. 17:14:08 [bhaisaab]: jburwell: did you try adding some break points? and does fails for you even with latest 4.1? 17:14:45 [topcloud]: bhaisaab: jburwell: let's stay on post meeting and work on this. 17:14:52 [chipc]: bhaisaab / jburwell: can we table, or move that discussion to #cloudstack-dev? 17:14:54 [bhaisaab]: ke4qqq: with growing no. of committers, if we don't have some kind of review process, it's gonna make things difficult 17:15:07 [topcloud]: +1 to that 17:15:30 [bhaisaab]: chipc: topcloud ok! jburwell we can work on it later or you can file an issue, start a thread on ML. 17:15:38 [chipc]: ok, so no QA folks in the meeting... let's try to move on with the limited folks we have here now 17:15:38 [_ps]: bhaisaab: +1 # 4. 4.1.0 Doc Status # 17:16:03 [chipc]: It appears that docs are moving along, but are still lagging 17:16:17 [ke4qqq]: well hopefully we've unblocked at least one docs contributor 17:16:20 [chipc]: ke4qqq: do you know if jzb is still doing the doc sprint on Friday? 17:16:25 [chipc]: +1 to that 17:16:26 [ke4qqq]: chipc: yes 17:16:41 [chipc]: great - so we'll be behind schedule, but we'll be able to pull into 4.1 as they complete 17:16:42 [_ps]: chipc: Any specific feature you are looking for the documentation to be done by now ? 17:17:05 [chipc]: well, reviewing the published doc plan (no link handy), there were plenty outstanding 17:17:12 [bhaisaab]: anyone doing one of cloudmonkey, if not I can take it up next week? 17:17:18 [bhaisaab]: *of -> on 17:17:25 [chipc]: bhaisaab: unknown 17:17:32 [ke4qqq]: bhaisaab: sebgoa talked about it 17:17:40 [ke4qqq]: might follow up with him 17:17:41 [bhaisaab]: okay will do 17:17:47 [_ps]: bhaisaab: I heard Jessica T might pick that up 17:18:02 [ke4qqq]: or rather he mentioned it in IRC 17:18:10 [ke4qqq]: ACTION doesn't want to obligate him....much 17:18:17 [chipc]: bhaisaab: if jessica was looking at it, perhaps you can offer to take it instead 17:18:25 [chipc]: perhaps freeing her up for other features? 17:18:55 [chipc]: I was going to ask sebgoa to talk about translation status today, but I know he's at the conference 17:19:02 [bhaisaab]: okay I will ask both of them if they can do it, it's fine, else I'll take it up free them for some other stuff 17:19:12 [ke4qqq]: chipc: I can get you an update in a few minutes - come back to that 17:19:17 [chipc]: great! thanks! 17:19:25 [chipc]: ke4qqq: ok - I'll loop back at the end 17:19:33 [chipc]: next topic # 5. 4.1.0 Additional issues # 17:19:41 [chipc]: packaging is the main one 17:19:48 [chipc]: so it *seems* that RPMs are good now 17:20:10 [chipc]: and noa having access to commit helped him get the deb stuff into the repo this morning (my morning) 17:20:19 [chipc]: but I think that it's incomplete from his description 17:20:25 [sudhap]: chipc: QA is on the call - when you get a chance give me some time 17:20:32 [chipc]: ok 17:20:40 [chipc]: will come back to that 17:20:55 [chipc]: so packaging is my "additional issue" concern 17:20:55 [bhaisaab]: So, systemvm template issue is settled; we'll use both of them; the old one, and work on the new one, if it's done, people can build their own for ipv6 etc... 17:20:56 [bhaisaab]: ? 17:20:58 [chipc]: any other 4.1.0 concerns (coming back to QA shortly) 17:21:25 [chipc]: bhaisaab: I believe that we label v6 as experimental 17:21:25 [jburwell]: chipc: mgmt sir memory consumption 17:21:32 [jburwell]: oops mgmt svr 17:21:40 [chipc]: jburwell: ack - just a sec 17:21:50 [bhaisaab]: chipc: cool, okay! 17:21:58 [chipc]: bhaisaab: I said that on the thread, and would like others to chime in with agreement 17:22:10 [bhaisaab]: ok :) got it 17:22:25 [chipc]: because I think that it's not acceptable to try to get a fully tested new system VM into production quality now 17:22:35 [bhaisaab]: jburwell: we've asked kelven to fix master; he already fixed 4.1 and it's much better now; about 45-55% memory usage reduction 17:22:35 [chipc]: btw - nice work (+ chiradeep) on the system vm build process 17:22:48 [bhaisaab]: thanks :) 17:22:58 [chipc]: jburwell: on the mem - are you concerned about master or 4.1? 17:23:02 [bhaisaab]: chipc: you can build on your system, empowering the devs :) 17:23:02 [chipc]: because we're in the 4.1 topic 17:23:17 [jburwell]: chipc: 4.1 17:23:33 [chipc]: so have you tested after kelvin's changes arrived in the 4.1 branch? 17:23:48 [chipc]: or are you saying that the improvement isn't enough> 17:23:48 [chipc]: ? 17:24:04 [jburwell]: chipc: I don't know when they landed, but am running based on a pull from mid-morning 17:24:34 [chipc]: they were in there before that 17:24:42 [chipc]: ok - so that's an outstanding issue 17:24:48 [jburwell]: it's burning around 1.5MB on my box right now 17:24:48 [jburwell]: was less than 512 MB previously for the same configuration/load 17:24:48 [bhaisaab]: okay, I've test 4.1 and I can confirm it runs better and faster now than it used to be 17:25:11 [chipc]: #info jburwell reporting that 4.1 management server is still consuming quite a bit more mem than 4.0 17:25:13 [bhaisaab]: the peak usage was 417 MB for me, it lowered after basic zone deployment for me 17:25:40 [chipc]: ok, well that's one to follow up on 17:25:51 [chipc]: anyone want to take an action for that? 17:26:02 [sudhap]: chipc: This was resolved for QA compared to the original issue - but will check if this is better than before or same or worse 17:26:18 [bhaisaab]: oh man, we've to ask Kelven he only understand it better 17:26:40 [chipc]: sudhap: thx 17:26:55 [sudhap]: we are running automation also - so I should be able to get some data points 17:27:05 [chipc]: #action sudhap to check with QA to see what the 4.1 mgmt server memory looks like, vs previous versions 17:27:10 [bhaisaab]: coollike benchmarks? 17:27:12 [likitha]: i too found it to be much better. 17:27:25 [chipc]: ok - let's transition back to QA status # 6. 4.1.0 QA Status (take 2) # 17:27:32 [chipc]: sudhap: can you talk about status? 17:27:40 [chipc]: I hit the bug counts already 17:27:48 [sudhap]: We are seeing improvement in burning down blockers since yesterday 17:27:48 [chipc]: with a plea for people to grab blockers and crits 17:28:02 [chipc]: how about test execution status? 17:28:17 [sudhap]: some long standing items were resolved so making progress on feature validation 17:28:47 [sudhap]: So far closed around 7 features and some are infrastructure features which I have to follow up on individuals 17:28:55 [sudhap]: So would be able to close those 17:29:02 [sudhap]: Automation blockers are closed for Xen and KVM 17:29:05 [chipc]: one thing that might help - can we clarify if blockers are blocking test execution vs blocking a release based on impact? 17:29:18 [chipc]: because one impacts schedule, while the other impacts release quality 17:29:20 [sudhap]: chipc: Yes defintely 17:29:25 [chipc]: thx 17:29:40 [sudhap]: Will be getting to a state to post metrics 17:29:47 [vogxn]: sudhap, one blocker found for kvmtoday 17:30:02 [sudhap]: UI one or something else?? 17:30:02 [chipc]: #action sudhap to help claify if blockers are blocking test execution or are release quality issues 17:30:12 [vogxn]: ssvm not up 17:30:33 [ke4qqq]: ACTION doesn't understand how a blocker to running tests isn't a blocker for release 17:30:40 [vogxn]: marcus looking into it 17:30:55 [sudhap]: ok - Vijay provided some analysis yesterday - thougt that this is related to permissions. 17:31:10 [chipc]: ke4qqq: they block a release... but blocking testing is worse than blocking a release 17:31:10 [vogxn]: thats vmware ithink 17:31:17 [chipc]: because it means things are probably hidden behind it 17:31:25 [sudhap]: vogxn: ok 17:31:33 [ke4qqq]: chipc: indeed 17:31:33 [sudhap]: I did not check blocker list this morning 17:31:48 [chipc]: ke4qqq: so that's the distinction I was trying to get at 17:31:55 [chipc]: ok - sudhap - anything else? 17:32:25 [bhaisaab]: ACTION I've to go now, thanks folks! 17:32:25 [sudhap]: chipc: that is about it but need to get test plan from Ilya - would like to understand if there is an effort to write a test plan or no 17:32:47 [sudhap]: Then I will look for someone else to write it if ilya can provide help to execute it 17:33:02 [chipc]: sudhap: ok - I'd suggest keeping in mind that he's a volunteer for that feature... 17:33:17 [chipc]: sudhap: which you just basically said as I wrote that 17:33:18 [chipc]: ;-) 17:33:25 [chipc]: ok - moving topics # 7. 4.0.2 updates (Active Bug-Fix Release) # 17:33:43 [chipc]: does anyone here know anything about 4.0.2? 17:33:55 [chipc]: do we have anything to discuss about that release? 17:34:11 [ke4qqq]: jzb is working on it- taking second place to docs sprint fwiu 17:34:19 [chipc]: yeah, and that's fair 17:34:41 [chipc]: actually, we need to formalize the informal concensus we reached WRT feature release support lifetime 17:35:02 [chipc]: because if we don't kick out a 4.0.2 before 4.1, do we do it at all? 17:35:17 [chipc]: anyone want to try to formalize that? 17:35:50 [chipc]: ok, guess not... 17:35:55 [ke4qqq]: I'm happy to start the conversation 17:36:02 [ke4qqq]: ACTION is lagging at the keynote - /me apologizes 17:36:10 [chipc]: ke4qqq: that would be great if you could 17:36:19 [chipc]: ok - then next topic # 8. Master Branch discussions # 17:36:32 [chipc]: anything to discuss on the master branch? 17:36:41 [chipc]: besides the general problem of master stability ;-( 17:36:55 [vogxn]: just wnt the mem fix 17:37:10 [chipc]: +1 17:37:17 [ke4qqq]: ACTION wants better stability fixes - and reports from the devcloud tests as well 17:37:41 [vogxn]: server wasnt coming up today. edison will probablyget to it 17:37:48 [chipc]: #info vogxn commented that getting the memory reduction fixes ported from 4.1 to master would be helpful 17:38:42 [chipc]: ok, anything else about master? 17:39:12 [chipc]: ok, moving on - and perhaps wrapping up soon # 9. Infra discussions # 17:39:20 [sudhap]: chipc: QA is logging defects for master as 4.2 so blockers can be reviewed with that fix version query 17:39:27 [chipc]: do we have any project infra statements? 17:39:32 [chipc]: sudhap: thanks 17:39:41 [ke4qqq]: sudhap: why is QA testing against master as opposed to 4.1? 17:39:55 [ke4qqq]: I mean - testing at all is good, I am just curious 17:40:10 [chipc]: ke4qqq: wouldn't that be for testing features that are for 4.2? 17:40:40 [sudhap]: 4.1 is being tested mainly - but some have used 4.2 as either complete feature is not allowed on to 4.1 or feature is only checked in to master - some folks volunteered for specific features 17:40:47 [sudhap]: which they are interested 17:40:49 [ke4qqq]: I suppose - just I have a perception that testing cycles are limited....and current focus is presumably 4.1 17:40:56 [ke4qqq]: ahhh ok - that makes good sense 17:41:17 [chipc]: sudhap: I actually applaud that 17:41:32 [ke4qqq]: agreed - testing what you are interested in is awesome. 17:41:32 [vogxn]: +1 17:41:47 [chipc]: because I really would like to actually get things tested prior to merging... but that's a step in the right direction (i.e.: not waiting for the "QA" phase of a release) 17:41:49 [sudhap]: But for automation we are focusing only on 4.1 once we run all regressions will run on master # 10. Other? # 17:42:17 [topcloud]: chipc and jburwell: I do have one thing I want to talk about for 4.1 17:42:27 [chipc]: since we weren't talking about any infra, switched topic to other 17:42:33 [chipc]: so let's talk about topcloud's thing 17:42:42 [chipc]: topcloud: you have the floor! 17:42:48 [topcloud]: I think we need to add in parameters for maven to set the java compat levels for 4.1 source code. 17:42:55 [topcloud]: don't think it's set right now. 17:43:02 [jburwell]: topcloud: those should always be set 17:43:10 [topcloud]: agreed. 17:43:11 [jburwell]: so if they aren't, we should put them in ricky tick 17:43:19 [topcloud]: i took a look though. 17:43:27 [topcloud]: i'm not how to set it in one place and have it all work. 17:43:33 [topcloud]: looks like i have to touch all the pom files. 17:43:40 [jburwell]: topcloud: you shouldn;t 17:43:41 [chipc]: topcloud / jburwell: does one of you want to raise that on the ML, and then do it? 17:43:48 [topcloud]: so i might have a big change like that coming into 4.1 17:43:55 [jburwell]: that is something you should only need to do in the root pom 17:43:55 [ke4qqq]: parent pom isn't enough 17:44:02 [topcloud]: just want to alert you guys make sure it's ok. 17:44:17 [topcloud]: i thought it should be ok but I'm just not very familiar with maven. 17:44:25 [chipc]: topcloud: just call it out on the dev list, but I'm +1 to that 17:44:25 [topcloud]: i couldn't see how it can be done in the parent pom 17:44:32 [topcloud]: ok...i'll bring it up on dev list. 17:44:34 [jburwell]: ke4qqq: while I am not a maven expert (in fact I hate it with a purple passion), every maven project I have worked on set it in the root pom and it worked .. 17:44:55 [chipc]: #action topcloud to raise setting the java compat options from within the poms for 4.1 on the list 17:44:55 [jburwell]: do our POMs actually inherit? 17:45:25 [vogxn]: they do. couldbebetter 17:45:25 [topcloud]: there's a child tree but i'm not sure if they inherit. 17:45:40 [topcloud]: not a big maven expert either but i'll try to take up this change. 17:46:02 [jburwell]: it looks like they do 17:46:19 [jburwell]: the java plugin properties from root should be applied to the children 17:46:32 [jburwell]: provided the children don't override the java plugin settings 17:46:42 [jburwell]: we can mess with it offline 17:46:55 [jburwell]: to determine the lowest touch modification 17:46:55 [topcloud]: anyways. that's it from me. 17:47:05 [topcloud]: definitely parent pom should be the way to go if we can. 17:47:16 [chipc]: great - thanks for that topcloud 17:47:24 [chipc]: so moving on... any other topics for today? 17:48:01 [chipc]: so let's call it a wrap then 17:48:03 [chipc]: thanks all!
