Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] DRBD integration as volume driver

Hello Duncan, > The best thing to do with the code is push up a gerrit review! No need > to be shy, and you're very welcome to push up code before the > blueprint is in, it just won't get merged. thank you for your encouragement! I pushed another fix for Cinder last week (2 lines, allowing to st

Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer][gate] ceilometer unit test frequently failing in gate

> Over the last 7 days ceilometer unit test jobs have a 18% failure rate in the > gate queue [0], while we see expect to see some failures in integration > testing, unit tests should not be failing in the gate with such a high > frequency (and for so long). > > It looks like these failures are d

[openstack-dev] [mistral] Multi-tenancy and ceilometer triggers

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi I was looking at https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/mistral-ceilometer-integration and trying to figure out how to implement that. I can see some problems: - - at the moment the trust is created when you PUT the workbook definition

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] [Ironic] [Heat] Mid-cycle collaborative meetup

That seems pretty solid reasoning; +1 from me no July 21-25th; I know not everyone can attend - but with the size of the team every situation will have some folk that can't play. What do we need to do to lock this in to RedHat's venue schedule? -Rob On 9 June 2014 11:44, Jaromir Coufal wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

My vote is for option #2 (without the registration). It is simpler to start with this approach. How is delete handled though? Ex. What is the expectation when user attempts to delete a certificate/container which is referred by an entity like LBaaS listener? 1. Will there be validation

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] mocking policy

I have no problem with this proposal. David On 6/4/14, 6:41 AM, "Radomir Dopieralski" wrote: >Hello, > >I'd like to start a discussion about the use of mocking libraries in >Horizon's tests, in particular, mox and mock. > >As you may know, Mox is the library that has been used so far, and we >h

[openstack-dev] [gantt] scheduler group meeting agenda 6/10

1) Forklift (tasks & status) 2) No-db scheduler discussion 3) Policy based scheduler ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/61386/ ) 4) Opens -- Don Dugger "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale Ph: 303/443-3786 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list

[openstack-dev] [Ironic+Nova] Is it recommended to use Nova driver to manage Ironic ?

Hi, All: I've read "GUIDE 2: Deploying with DevStack and Ironic+Nova " on *https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicDeployDevstack * Is it recommended to use Nova driver to manage Ironic ? Or Is it recommended to use TripleO to m

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

Howdy Kyle, On 9 June 2014 22:37, Kyle Mestery wrote: > After talking with various infra folks, we've noticed the Tail-f CI > system is not voting anymore. According to some informal research, the > last run for this CI setup was in April [1]. Can you verify this > system is still running? We wi

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

Weighing in here: I'm all for option #2 as well. Stephen On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Douglas Mendizabal's message of 2014-06-09 16:08:02 -0700: > > Hi all, > > > > I’m strongly in favor of having immutable TLS-typed containers, and very > > much opposed

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] oslo-specs approval process

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: > Hi all, > > While the oslo-specs repository has been available for a while and a > number of specs proposed, we hadn't agreed on a process for actually > approving them (i.e. the normal 2 +2's or something else). This was > discussed at the Oslo

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Requirements around statistics and billing

Hi Jorge, This thread as started mostly to try to determine what people are actually after, as far as stats collection goes. Surprisingly (to me at least), it doesn't look like we need all that much to meet the needs of those who have responded to this thread thus far. In any case, my sights are

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > > >> Based on the discussion I'd like to propose these options: >> 1. Cinder-certified driver - This is an attempt to move the "certification" >> to the project level. >> 2. CI-tested driver - This is probably the most accurate, at least for wh

[openstack-dev] [ceilometer][gate] ceilometer unit test frequently failing in gate

Over the last 7 days ceilometer unit test jobs have a 18% failure rate in the gate queue [0], while we see expect to see some failures in integration testing, unit tests should not be failing in the gate with such a high frequency (and for so long). It looks like these failures are due to two bugs

Re: [openstack-dev] [hacking] Hacking 0.9.1 released

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > Hi folks, > > Hacking 0.9.1 has just been released (hacking 0.9.1 had a minor bug). > Unlike other dependencies 'OpenStack Proposal Bot' does not automatically > push out a patch to the new version. > Edit: hacking 0.9.0 had a minor bug > Th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

Excerpts from Douglas Mendizabal's message of 2014-06-09 16:08:02 -0700: > Hi all, > > I’m strongly in favor of having immutable TLS-typed containers, and very > much opposed to storing every revision of changes done to a container. I > think that storing versioned containers would add too much c

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

I understand how this could be helpful, but I still don’t understand why this is Barbican’s problem to solve. >From Jorge’s original email: >> Using this method requires services, such as LBaaS, to "register" in >>the form of metadata to a barbican container. If our assumptions are that the GUI

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] [Ironic] DB migration woes

Mike, For the "typical" case, your proposal sounds reasonable to me. That should protect against cross-session locking while still getting the benefits of testing DML without committing to disk. The issue I was originally raising is, of course, the "special" case -- testing of migrations -- which

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

The use case was that a cert inside the container could be updated while the private key stays the same. IE a new cert would be a resigning of the same old key. By immutable we mean to say that the same UUID would be used on the lbaas side. This is a heavy handed way of expecting the user to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

The impression I have from this thread is that Containers should remain immutable, but it would be helpful to allow services like LBaaS to register as interested in a given Container. This could be the full URI to the load balancer instance for example. This information would allow clients to se

[openstack-dev] [Nova] [Ironic] [TripleO] Fixing HostManager, take two

Last week, we tried to fix a bug in the way that Nova's baremetal and ironic drivers are using the HostManager / HostState classes -- they're incorrectly reporting capabilities in an older fashion, which is not in use any more, and thus not exposing the node's "stats" to the scheduler. The fix actu

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

Hi all, I’m strongly in favor of having immutable TLS-typed containers, and very much opposed to storing every revision of changes done to a container. I think that storing versioned containers would add too much complexity to Barbican, where immutable containers would work well. I’m still not

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

The barbican team was considering making the container mutable but I don't think it matters now since every one has chimed in and wants the container to be immutable. The current discussion now is that the TLS container will be immutable but the meta data will not be. I'm not sure what is mea

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

> Based on the discussion I'd like to propose these options: > 1. Cinder-certified driver - This is an attempt to move the "certification" > to the project level. > 2. CI-tested driver - This is probably the most accurate, at least for what > we're trying to achieve for Juno: Continuous Integrati

[openstack-dev] [oslo] oslo-specs approval process

Hi all, While the oslo-specs repository has been available for a while and a number of specs proposed, we hadn't agreed on a process for actually approving them (i.e. the normal 2 +2's or something else). This was discussed at the Oslo meeting last Friday and the method decided upon by the people

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

I could not agree more with the need to re-think Marconi’s current approach to scenario breadth and implementation extensibility/flexibility. The broader the HTTP API surface area, the more limited are the implementation choices, and the harder are performance trade-offs. Current HTTP APIs of Ma

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote: > Folks, this may be a bit of a bombshell, but I think we have been dancing > around the issue for a while now and we need to address it head on. Let me > start with some background. > > Back when we started designing the Marconi API, we knew t

[openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

Hi Luke: After talking with various infra folks, we've noticed the Tail-f CI system is not voting anymore. According to some informal research, the last run for this CI setup was in April [1]. Can you verify this system is still running? We will need this to be working by the middle of Juno-2, wit

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] Official bug tags

Hi all! Dmitry called it to my attention last week that we lacked any official guidelines on bug tags, and I've just gotten around to following up on it. I've created an official list in launchpad and added that to the OpenStack bug tag tags list wiki page here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/B

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

Option A can be made usable provided you do the following: 1. Add an endpoint for determining whether or not the current service supports optional feature X. 2. For each optional feature of the API, clearly document that the feature is optional, and name the feature it is part of.

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] blueprint ovs-firewall-driver: OVS implementation of security groups

Paul, Beyond explicit configuration for the cloud operator, documentation and API validation for the end user, is there anything specific you would like to see as a “warning label”? Does iptables do TCP sequence number validation? Where we can, we should strive to match iptables behavior. Rega

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] blueprint ovs-firewall-driver: OVS implementation of security groups

Carl, You are correct in both distinctions. Like I mentioned to Paul, beyond explicit configuration for the cloud operator, documentation and API validation for the end user, is there anything specific you would like to see as a “warning label”? Amir On Jun 3, 2014, at 9:01 AM, Carl Baldwin m

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] blueprint ovs-firewall-driver: OVS implementation of security groups

Salvatore, The 80% distinction came from a discussion I had at summit, representing that the majority of features described by the current security groups could be implemented today with OVS without connection tracking. It’s not based on any mathematical calculation… more of a pseudo-applicatio

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Arbitrary "extra specs" for compute nodes?

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 06/09/2014 01:38 PM, Joe Cropper wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:17 AM, Day, Phil wrote: >>> >>> Hi Joe, >>> >>> >>> >>> Can you give some examples of what that data would be used for ? >> >> >> Sure! For example, in the PowerKVM world

[openstack-dev] [ironic]Adding support for ManagedFRU in the IPMI driver

Hi I work for Kontron a hardware company that is a member of the foundation since this year. One of our blade product hold 2 complete servers (I7 Haswell chip, 16Gb ram, 120 Gb SSD each) that are managed by a single IPMI BMC (Board Management Controller) using the IPMI "ManagedFRU" concept. Thi

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] Designate Incubation Request

On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 07:25 -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/06/2014 12:06 PM, Mac Innes, Kiall wrote: > > Several of the TC requested we have an openstack-infra managed DevStack > > gate enabled before they would cast their vote - I'm happy to say, we've > > got it :) > > > > With the merge of [1

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] [Ironic] DB migration woes

On Jun 9, 2014, at 1:08 PM, Mike Bayer wrote: > > On Jun 9, 2014, at 12:50 PM, Devananda van der Veen > wrote: > >> There may be some problems with MySQL when testing parallel writes in >> different non-committing transactions, even in READ COMMITTED mode, >> due to InnoDB locking, if the qu

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

As per current implementation, containers are immutable. Do we have any use case to make it mutable? Can we live with new container instead of updating an existing container? Arvind -Original Message- From: Samuel Bercovici [mailto:samu...@radware.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 1:31

[openstack-dev] [UX] [Heat] [Mistral] [Murano] [Neutron] [Solum] Cross-project UI library: gathering the requirements

Hi All, At the Solum-Murano-Heat cross-project session [1] during the Openstack Juno Summit it was decided that it would be beneficial for the Solum, Murano and Heat projects to implement common UX patterns in separate library. During an early discussion several more projects were added (Mistral a

[openstack-dev] [hacking] Hacking 0.9.1 released

Hi folks, Hacking 0.9.1 has just been released (hacking 0.9.1 had a minor bug). Unlike other dependencies 'OpenStack Proposal Bot' does not automatically push out a patch to the new version. The recommended way to upgrade to hacking 0.9.1 is to add any new failing tests to the exclude list in tox

[openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

Folks, this may be a bit of a bombshell, but I think we have been dancing around the issue for a while now and we need to address it head on. Let me start with some background. Back when we started designing the Marconi API, we knew that we wanted to support several messaging patterns. We could

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

As far as I understand the Current Barbican implementation is immutable. Can anyone from Barbican comment on this? -Original Message- From: Jain, Vivek [mailto:vivekj...@ebay.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 8:34 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject:

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

On 06/09/2014 03:17 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > > So there are certain words that mean certain things, most don't, some do. If words that mean certain things are used then some folks start using the word and have expectations around the word and the OpenStack Technical Comm

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

> >> So there are certain words that mean certain things, most don't, some do. > >> > >> If words that mean certain things are used then some folks start using > >> the word and have expectations around the word and the OpenStack > >> Technical Committee and other OpenStack programs find themselv

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

>> So maybe the problem isn?t having the flavors so much, but in how the user currently has to specific an exact match from that list. If the user could say ?I want a flavor with these attributes? and then the system would find a ?best match? based on criteria set by the cloud admin then would t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] [Ironic] DB migration woes

On 06/09/2014 02:57 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 06/09/2014 12:50 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: There may be some problems with MySQL when testing parallel writes in different non-committing transactions, even in READ COMMITTED mod

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] [Ironic] DB migration woes

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 06/09/2014 12:50 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: >> >> There may be some problems with MySQL when testing parallel writes in >> different non-committing transactions, even in READ COMMITTED mode, >> due to InnoDB locking, if the queries use

[openstack-dev] [nova] New extra spec operator proposed

Hi folks, I submitted a new blueprint proposing the addition of a new operator to the existing ones. BP: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/add-all-in-list-operator-to-extra-spec-ops Spec review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98179/ What do you think? Thanks, Facundo. _

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] shared review dashboard proposal

On 06/09/2014 01:38 PM, David Kranz wrote: > On 06/02/2014 06:57 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> Towards the end of the summit there was a discussion about us using a >> shared review dashboard to see if a common view by the team would help >> accelerate people looking at certain things. I spent some time

[openstack-dev] [Infra] Meeting Tuesday June 10th at 19:00 UTC

Hi everyone, The OpenStack Infrastructure (Infra) team is hosting our weekly meeting on Tuesday June 10th, at 19:00 UTC in #openstack-meeting Meeting agenda available here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/InfraTeamMeeting (anyone is welcome to to add agenda items) Everyone interested in

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA][Infra] Mid-Cycle Meet-up

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:07:07PM -0400, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > So we'd like to announce to everyone that we're going to be doing a combined > Infra and QA program mid-cycle meet-up. It will be the week of July 14th in > Darmstadt, Germany at Deutsche Telekom who has gracio

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

On 06/09/2014 12:47 PM, Joe Cropper wrote: There may also be specific software entitlement issues that make it useful to deterministically know which host your VM will be placed on. This can be quite common in large organizations that have certain software that can be tied to certain hardware or

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

On 06/09/2014 12:32 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: On 06/09/2014 07:59 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 06/06/2014 08:07 AM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote: Forcing an instance to a specific host is very useful for the operator - it fulfills a valid use case for monitoring and testing purposes. Pray tell, wh

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Arbitrary "extra specs" for compute nodes?

On 06/09/2014 01:38 PM, Joe Cropper wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:17 AM, Day, Phil wrote: Hi Joe, Can you give some examples of what that data would be used for ? Sure! For example, in the PowerKVM world, hosts can be dynamically configured to run in split-core processor mode. This set

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV] Re: NFV in OpenStack use cases and context

- Original Message - > From: "Steve Gordon" > To: "ITAI MENDELSOHN (ITAI)" , "OpenStack > Development Mailing List (not for usage > > Just adding openstack-dev to the CC for now :). > > - Original Message - > > From: "ITAI MENDELSOHN (ITAI)" > > Subject: Re: NFV in OpenStack us

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] [Ironic] DB migration woes

On 06/09/2014 12:50 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: There may be some problems with MySQL when testing parallel writes in different non-committing transactions, even in READ COMMITTED mode, due to InnoDB locking, if the queries use non-unique secondary indexes for UPDATE or SELECT..FOR UPDATE q

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] shared review dashboard proposal

On 06/02/2014 06:57 AM, Sean Dague wrote: Towards the end of the summit there was a discussion about us using a shared review dashboard to see if a common view by the team would help accelerate people looking at certain things. I spent some time this weekend working on a tool to make building cus

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Arbitrary "extra specs" for compute nodes?

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:17 AM, Day, Phil wrote: > Hi Joe, > > > > Can you give some examples of what that data would be used for ? Sure! For example, in the PowerKVM world, hosts can be dynamically configured to run in split-core processor mode. This setting can be dynamically changed and it'd

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] [UX] Design for Alarming and Alarm Management

Hi all, Thanks again for the great comments on the initial cut of wireframes. I’ve updated them a fair amount based on feedback in this e-mail thread along with the feedback written up here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/alarm-management-page-design-discussion Here is a link to the new versi

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

+1 for the idea of making certificate immutable. However, if Barbican allows updating certs/containers then versioning is a must. Thanks, Vivek On 6/8/14, 11:48 PM, "Samuel Bercovici" wrote: >Hi, > >I think that option 2 should be preferred at this stage. >I also think that certificate should

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Arbitrary "extra specs" for compute nodes?

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 06/07/2014 12:30 AM, Joe Cropper wrote: >> >> Hi Folks, >> >> I was wondering if there was any such mechanism in the compute node >> structure to hold arbitrary key-value pairs, similar to flavors' >> "extra_specs" concept? >> >> It appear

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation scheduler filter - bug, or new feature proposal?

On Jun 9, 2014 4:12 AM, "Jesse Pretorius" wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > We have a need to be able to dedicate a specific host aggregate to a list of tenants/projects. If the aggregate is marked as such, the aggregate may only be used by that specified list of tenants and those tenants may only be sc

[openstack-dev] [Cinder] Third-Party CI Issue: direct access to review.openstack.org port 29418 required

All, I've been working on setting up our Cinder 3rd party CI setup. I ran into an issue where Zuul requires direct access to review.openstack.org port 29418, which is currently blocked in my environment. It should be unblocked around the end of June. Since this will likely affect other vendors,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

I understand this concern and was advocating that a configuration option be available to disable or enable auto updating of SSL certificates. But since every one is in favor of storing meta data on the barbican container directly I guess this is a moot point now. On Jun 6, 2014, at 5:52 PM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] [Ironic] DB migration woes

On Jun 9, 2014, at 12:50 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: > There may be some problems with MySQL when testing parallel writes in > different non-committing transactions, even in READ COMMITTED mode, > due to InnoDB locking, if the queries use non-unique secondary indexes > for UPDATE or SELEC

[openstack-dev] [Mistral] Mistral weekly meeting - meeting minutes

Hi team, Thank you all for participating in Mistral weekly meeting today, meeting minutes are available by the following links: Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/mistral_weekly_meeting/2014/mistral_weekly_meeting.2014-06-09-15.59.html Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/

Re: [openstack-dev] Stateful Applications on OpenStack

Hi Hossein, In additions you may check the following: Heat OS::Heat::HARestarter resource http://docs.openstack.org/developer/heat/template_guide/openstack.html This blog entry about clustering: http://vmtrooper.com/openstack-your-windows-cluster-with-neutron-allowed-address-pairs/ Mistral project

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

Based on the discussion I'd like to propose these options: 1. Cinder-certified driver - This is an attempt to move the "certification" to the project level. 2. CI-tested driver - This is probably the most accurate, at least for what we're trying to achieve for Juno: Continuous Integration of Vend

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] [Ironic] DB migration woes

There may be some problems with MySQL when testing parallel writes in different non-committing transactions, even in READ COMMITTED mode, due to InnoDB locking, if the queries use non-unique secondary indexes for UPDATE or SELECT..FOR UPDATE queries. This is done by the "with_lockmode('update')" SQ

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

There may also be specific software entitlement issues that make it useful to deterministically know which host your VM will be placed on. This can be quite common in large organizations that have certain software that can be tied to certain hardware or hardware with certain # of CPU capacity, etc

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

On 06/09/2014 07:59 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 06/06/2014 08:07 AM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote: Forcing an instance to a specific host is very useful for the operator - it fulfills a valid use case for monitoring and testing purposes. Pray tell, what is that valid use case? I find it useful

Re: [openstack-dev] Stateful Applications on OpenStack

Really thanks Georgy for your complete answer. My major concern on openstack was HA on my legacy apps(I wanted to use cloudstack instead of openstack becasue of its more attention to legacy apps and more HA features). But now, I will check your listed HA solutions on openstack and come back as soon

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Spec review request

Please don't send review requests to the list. The preferred methods of requesting reviews are explained here: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-September/015264.html Thanks. -Ben On 06/07/2014 12:31 AM, Kanzhe Jiang wrote: > The serviceBase and insertion spec has been up

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

Hey German, I agree with you. I don't really want to go with option #1 because making decisions on behalf of the user (especially when security is involved) can be quite tricky and dangerous. Your concerns are valid for option #2 but I still think it is the better option to go with. I believe Carl

Re: [openstack-dev] Stateful Applications on OpenStack

Hi, You still can run legacy application on OpenStack with HA and DR using the same good old school tools like pacemaker, heartbeat, DRBD etc. There are all necessary features available in latest OpenStack. The most important feature for HA - secondary IP address was implemented in Havana. Now you

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] [Heat] Glance Metadata Catalog for Capabilities and Tags

FYI: We now have the initial Glance spec up for review. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98554/ We generalized a few concepts and will look at how to bring a few of those concepts back in potentially via a future spec. Thanks, Travis From: Tripp, Travis S Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 4:27 PM To

[openstack-dev] The possible ways of high availability for non-cloud-ready apps running on openstack

Hi there. I am dealing with large amount of legacy application(MediaWiki, Joomla, ...) running on openstack. I am looking for the best way to improve high availability of my instances. All applications are not designed for fail(Non-Cloud-Ready Apps). So, what is the best way of improving HA on my n

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

On 06/09/2014 03:38 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > > >> So there are certain words that mean certain things, most don't, some do. >> >> If words that mean certain things are used then some folks start using >> the word and have expectations around the word and the OpenStack >> Technical Committee and

Re: [openstack-dev] Arbitrary "extra specs" for compute nodes?

On 06/07/2014 12:30 AM, Joe Cropper wrote: Hi Folks, I was wondering if there was any such mechanism in the compute node structure to hold arbitrary key-value pairs, similar to flavors' "extra_specs" concept? It appears there are entries for things like pci_stats, stats and recently added extra

Re: [openstack-dev] Promoting healing script to scheme migration script?

On Mon, Jun 09, 2014, Jakub Libosvar wrote: > I'd like to get some opinions on following idea: > > Because currently we have (thanks to Ann) WIP of healing script capable > of changing database scheme by comparing tables in the database to > models in current codebase, I started to think whether

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-sdk-php] Reasons to use Behat/behavior driven development in an SDK?

Jamie, thanks for sharing those links. They are quite useful and led me to a couple questions. 1. To quote the first link, "To do this, we need a way to describe the requirement such that everyone – the business folks, the analyst, the developer and the tester – have a common understanding of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Mid-cycle questions for folks

I had to call too. I got same conditions as Carl. cheers, Rossella On 06/05/2014 04:45 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > It would be ideal if folks could use the room block I reserved when > booking, if their company policy allows it. I've gotten word from the > hotel they may release the block if more

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][db] Promoting healing script to scheme migration script?

Forgot to add tags, sorry On 06/09/2014 04:18 PM, Jakub Libosvar wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to get some opinions on following idea: > > Because currently we have (thanks to Ann) WIP of healing script capable > of changing database scheme by comparing tables in the database to > models in curr

Re: [openstack-dev] Stateful Applications on OpenStack

In my experience building apps that run in OpenStack, you don't give up state. You shift how you handle state. For example, instead of always routing a user to the same instance and that instance holding the session data there is a common session store for the app (possibly synced between regions)

[openstack-dev] Promoting healing script to scheme migration script?

Hi all, I'd like to get some opinions on following idea: Because currently we have (thanks to Ann) WIP of healing script capable of changing database scheme by comparing tables in the database to models in current codebase, I started to think whether it could be used generally to db upgrades inst

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-sdk-php] Use of final and private keywords to limit extending

If you don't mind I'd like to step back for a moment and talk about the end users of this codebase and the types code it will be used in. We're looking to make application developers successful in PHP. The top 10% of PHP application developers aren't an issue. If they have an SDK or not they will

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

On 06/05/2014 09:54 AM, Day, Phil wrote: -Original Message- From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] Sent: 04 June 2014 19:23 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler On 06/04/2014 11:56 A

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

On 06/06/2014 08:07 AM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote: Forcing an instance to a specific host is very useful for the operator - it fulfills a valid use case for monitoring and testing purposes. Pray tell, what is that valid use case? I am not defending a particular way of doing this, just bri

[openstack-dev] Constraint validation and property list filtering in Murano

Hi folks, There is an important topic which I would like to discuss: it seems like there is a place for improvement in UI validation and filtering in Murano. The reason of writing this is a change-set [1] (being an implementation of blueprint [2]) which allows package developers to specify the co

[openstack-dev] [all] Gate still backed up - need assistance with nova-network logging enhancements

Based on some back of envelope math the gate is basically processing 2 changes an hour, failing one of them. So if you want to know how long the gate is, take the length / 2 in hours. Right now we're doing a lot of revert roulette, trying to revert things that we think landed about the time things

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] One performance issue about VXLAN pool initiation

Mike, Thanks a lot for your response! Some comments: > There’s some in-Python filtering following it which does not seem necessary; the "alloc.vxlan_vni not in vxlan_vnis” phrase > could just as well be a SQL “NOT IN” expression. There we have to do specific set intersection between configured ran

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation scheduler filter - bug, or new feature proposal?

Hi Jesse, I would say that is a documentation bug for the “AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation” filter. When this was implemented the objective was to schedule only instances from specific tenants for those aggregates but not make them exclusive. That’s why the work on https://blueprints.launchpad.

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] Using saltstack as orchestrator for fuel

Hi folks, I know that sometime ago saltstack was evaluated to be used as orchestrator in fuel, so I've prepared some initial specification, that addresses basic points of integration, and general requirements for orchestrator. In my opinion saltstack perfectly fits our needs, and we can benefit f

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][Tuskar-UI] Location for common dashboard code?

Hiya, That makes sense. Just to take a concrete example - in tuskar-ui, our flavors' table code (https://github.com/openstack/tuskar-ui/blob/master/tuskar_ui/infrastructure/flavors/tables.py) uses the following code from openstack_dashboard.dashboards.admin.flavors.tables (https://github.com/ope

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

> On 9 June 2014 09:44, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > > > Since "certification" seems to be quite an overloaded term > > already, I wonder would a more back-to-basics phrase such as > > "quality assured" better capture the Cinder project's use of > > the word? > > > > It does exactly what it says on th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

Hi All, A Spec RST document was added to Gerrit for review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98640 You are welcome to start commenting it for any open discussions. I tried to address each aspect being discussed, please add comments about missing things. Thanks, Evgeny -Original Message

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

On 6 June 2014 18:29, Anita Kuno wrote: > So there are certain words that mean certain things, most don't, some do. > > If words that mean certain things are used then some folks start using > the word and have expectations around the word and the OpenStack > Technical Committee and other OpenStac

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS support RST document on Gerrit

Hi All, A Spec. RST document for LBaaS TLS support was added to Gerrit for review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98640 You are welcome to start commenting it for any open discussions. I tried to address each aspect being discussed, please add comments about missing things. Thanks, E

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

On 9 June 2014 09:44, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > Since "certification" seems to be quite an overloaded term > already, I wonder would a more back-to-basics phrase such as > "quality assured" better capture the Cinder project's use of > the word? > > It does exactly what it says on the tin ... i.e. cap

[openstack-dev] Stateful Applications on OpenStack

Hi OpenStack Development Community, I know that the OpenStack interest is to become a cloud computing operating system. And this simple sentence means: "Say goodbye to Statefull Applications". But, as you know we are in the transition phase from stateful apps to stateless apps(Remember Pets and Cat

  1   2   >