Re: [Openstack-operators] Invitation to Ops session in Okinawa Open Days in Dec

2015-11-09 Thread Tom Fifield
Hi everyone, I just wanted to add to Mizuno san's welcome here. The Okinawa Open Days is a great event and I am excited to see more OpenStack ops come from Japan and around Asia. I know it's a bit short notice, but I think we'll have a great time, so I would also welcome you to Okinawa! Reg

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Robert Collins
On 10 November 2015 at 08:22, matt wrote: > tons from what i've seen. there are a LOT of havana and even earlier stuff > out there. essex is still out there in the wild. >From the Mitaka keynotes we know there are substantial sized public clouds still in production running Diablo... -Rob --

Re: [Openstack-operators] Error: Actor Crashed

2015-11-09 Thread JJ Asghar
On 11/9/15 8:05 AM, Riccardo Diago wrote: > Hi all, Hi! > I don't know if this problem is ok for this list. If not, please > address me into the right one. Technically speaking we do our work off the [openstack-dev][chef] list, but no harm to foul. > But when I run the command: > > * chef

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Jonathan Proulx
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 04:05:51PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: :Can you be more specific about "upgrade process is hell!"? We continue :to work on improvements in upgrade testing to block patches that will :make life hell for upgrading. Getting a bunch of specifics on bugs that :triggered during upgr

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread matt
Another point I forgot, is vendor ecosystem. Some vendors require major outages in openstack to upgrade their own stacks. Usually because they are doing something wrong. But it's their way or the highway. Not really openstack's community at fault, but it is a very real issue for many deployers.

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread matt
Sean, I am not sure this can be completely or even satisfactorily addressed by the OpenStack community. A part of the problem is supporting environment. As OpenStack advances it relies on advancing underlying operating systems and development environments. Example is the shift from 12.04 to

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Clayton O'Neill
I do think it’s gotten better in some ways and I expect it will continue to get better. The Nova team’s work for live upgrades is definitely the way we’d like to see everything going. However, I think a lot of us have had to fight with OVS agent restarts during upgrades (I know it’s fixed in Libe

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Sean Dague
On 11/09/2015 03:49 PM, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote: > On 11/09/15 22:06, Tom Cameron wrote: >>> I would not call that the extreme minority. >>> I would say a good percentage of users are on only getting to Juno now. >> The survey seems to indicate lots of people are on Havana, Icehouse >> and Juno

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Maish Saidel-Keesing
On 11/09/15 22:06, Tom Cameron wrote: I would not call that the extreme minority. I would say a good percentage of users are on only getting to Juno now. The survey seems to indicate lots of people are on Havana, Icehouse and Juno in production. I would love to see the survey ask _why_ people a

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Maish Saidel-Keesing
On 11/09/15 22:18, matt wrote: Hell. There's no clear upgrade path, and no guaranteed matched functionality just for starters. Also most enterprise deployments do 3 to 5 year deployment plans. This ties into how equipment / power / resources are budgeted in the project plans. They don't w

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread matt
=D On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Tom Cameron wrote: > YOLO. Because it's in The Cloud. > > > > -- > Tom Cameron > > > > -- > *From:* Donald Talton > *Sent:* Monday, November 9, 2015 15:41 > *To:* matt; Tom Cameron > *Cc:* openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org > *

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Tom Cameron
YOLO. Because it's in The Cloud. -- Tom Cameron From: Donald Talton Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 15:41 To: matt; Tom Cameron Cc: openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org Subject: RE: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" fo

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Donald Talton
All good points, but I’m not sure about the 3-5 window…it’s so anti-cloud. Although I think many of us are not doing cloudy things with OpenStack. That said, RedHat’s stable OSP releases are trailing 6mos behind community releases. And many of us do site-stability testing that lasts for months b

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread Boris Pavlovic
Joshua, I believe that was one of the original complaints/questions, is that > with osprofiler there is now 2 trace like headers > (https://github.com/openstack/osprofiler/blob/master/osprofiler/web.py#L36 > ) > and such being sent around, should we nail that down now and put that > complaint/ques

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Kris G. Lindgren
I wonder how many people forgot to update their cloud in the user survey. I almost did this, I noticed it had my cloud pre-defined and almost clicked next. Versus going in and editing the cloud to make sure the details were correct (they weren't). If I forgot to do this – I would have been re

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread matt
Hell. There's no clear upgrade path, and no guaranteed matched functionality just for starters. Also most enterprise deployments do 3 to 5 year deployment plans. This ties into how equipment / power / resources are budgeted in the project plans. They don't work with this mentality of rapid rel

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Tom Cameron
>I would not call that the extreme minority. >I would say a good percentage of users are on only getting to Juno now. The survey seems to indicate lots of people are on Havana, Icehouse and Juno in production. I would love to see the survey ask _why_ people are on older versions because for many

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-11-09 19:35:21 + (+), Kevin Bringard (kevinbri) wrote: [...] > Perhaps a good solution would be for the foundation to allow a > process by which vendors may maintain "canonical" (no pun > intended) stable branches which are community endorsed. Then > everyone has a common stable res

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Kevin Bringard (kevinbri)
It seems that this is where the "vendor vs upstream" argument really hits home. I think Tom hit it on the head: there's a delicate balance between how much resources "the community" can spend maintaining a release, vs when you should rely on a vendor. We had a similar discussion back in the Diab

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Jonathan Proulx
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 07:18:16PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: :On 2015-11-09 19:01:36 + (+), Tom Cameron wrote: :[...] :> What do the user/operator surveys say about the usage of older :> releases? What portion of the user base is actually on releases :> prior to Havana? : :The most recen

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Maish Saidel-Keesing
On 11/09/15 21:01, Tom Cameron wrote: From your other thread... Or else you're saying you intend to fix the current inability of our projects to skip intermediate releases entirely during upgrades I think without knowing it, that's what most would be suggesting, yeah. Of course, like you me

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread matt
tons from what i've seen. there are a LOT of havana and even earlier stuff out there. essex is still out there in the wild. On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-11-09 19:01:36 + (+), Tom Cameron wrote: > [...] > > What do the user/operator surveys say about t

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-11-09 19:01:36 + (+), Tom Cameron wrote: [...] > What do the user/operator surveys say about the usage of older > releases? What portion of the user base is actually on releases > prior to Havana? The most recent OpenStack User Survey Report has an awesome trending analysis answeri

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Fox, Kevin M
One thing more to consider, live upgrades still arn't a thing yet, but getting closer. Being able to do it with single version upgrades is a pretty hard thing. Doing it across LTS style releases wouldn't work without a huge amount of effort all on its own. We may be better off waiting until we

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Tom Cameron
>From your other thread... >Or else you're saying you intend to fix the current inability of our projects >to skip intermediate releases entirely during upgrades I think without knowing it, that's what most would be suggesting, yeah. Of course, like you mentioned, the real work is in how upgrad

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from James King's message of 2015-11-09 08:47:08 -0800: > disclaimer: I’ve never worked in a software auditing department or on in a > company with one > > What about risk-averse organizations with strict policy compliance > guidelines? Can we expect them to audit a new distribution of

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] Performance Team summit session results

2015-11-09 Thread Mark Wagner
For clarification, this is 3-4 PM (15:00 - 16:00) UTC, correct ?. -mark - Original Message - > From: "Dina Belova" > To: "Matt Riedemann" > Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List" , > openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org > Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 4:30:55 AM > Subject: Re: [

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] Performance Team summit session results

2015-11-09 Thread Dina Belova
Mark, yes, sorry for not mentioning it here. it's 3PM - 4PM UTC time zone. Cheers, Dina On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:51 AM, Mark Wagner wrote: > > For clarification, this is 3-4 PM (15:00 - 16:00) UTC, correct ?. > > -mark > > - Original Message - > > From: "Dina Belova" > > To: "Matt Ri

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-11-09 17:11:35 + (+), Tom Cameron wrote: [...] > I support an LTS release strategy because it will allow more > adoption for more sectors by offering that stability everyone's > talking about. But, it shouldn't be a super-super long support > offering. Maybe steal some of Ubuntu's g

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Tom Cameron
James, > What about risk-averse organizations with strict policy compliance guidelines? I strongly suspect most operators don't have customers (internal or otherwise) clamouring to upgrade every 6 months. But 5 years is, frankly, absurd. But, to the point about auditing, many organizations that

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Gareth
Thanks Jeremy, I hope it come earlier personally. Our company is designing next could product release, based on Juno. Now I have powerful talking points ;) On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:43 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-11-10 00:18:34 +0800 (+0800), Gareth wrote: >> BTW, what's the EOL date of

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread James King
disclaimer: I’ve never worked in a software auditing department or on in a company with one What about risk-averse organizations with strict policy compliance guidelines? Can we expect them to audit a new distribution of Openstack every 6 months? Some sort of community-supported LTS system woul

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-11-10 00:18:34 +0800 (+0800), Gareth wrote: > BTW, what's the EOL date of Juno? "2014.2.4 (eol) early November, 2015." https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fjuno_releases_.2812_months.29 > This was decided at the stable branch management session for the Li

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread Joshua Harlow
+1 from me (although I've already contributed to osprofiler so my vote might not count, ha). Anyway, people can poke me as well if they have any questions about osprofiler and boris isn't around. I'm happy to answer any questions as well... Thanks boris for getting this rolling again... Another q

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Gareth
BTW, what's the EOL date of Juno? On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Tom Cameron wrote: > On a personal level, supporting the same release of an open source project > for 5 years is something you should pay for...dearly. If operators have > customers that are pinned to Juno for some reason I could

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

2015-11-09 Thread Tom Cameron
On a personal level, supporting the same release of an open source project for 5 years is something you should pay for...dearly. If operators have customers that are pinned to Juno for some reason I couldn't imagine right now, and they're willing to pay us to support it, then great! But I thin

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread Boris Pavlovic
Gord, Something is definitely got there broken (after time that I didn't work on OSprofiler) and we should address that. Best regards, Boris Pavlovic On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:44 AM, gord chung wrote: > regarding ceilometer+oslo.messaging backend[1]. i feel like i should > mention, i'm not sur

[Openstack-operators] Error: Actor Crashed

2015-11-09 Thread Riccardo Diago
Hi all, I don't know if this problem is ok for this list. If not, please address me into the right one. Anyway, here the problem: I was trying running stable/kilo branch infrastructure with the following setting of chef dk: * Chef Development Kit Version: 0.9.0 * chef-client version: 12.5.1

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread gord chung
regarding ceilometer+oslo.messaging backend[1]. i feel like i should mention, i'm not sure how you guys are using the query but i should mention that is not the correct way to use Ceilometer meters as it currently isn't measuring anything (see hardcoded - volume:1) again, i'm not sure what que

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 02:57:37AM -0800, Boris Pavlovic wrote: > Hi stackers, > > Intro > --- > > It's not a big secret that OpenStack is huge and complicated ecosystem of > different > services that are working together to implement OpenStack API. > > For example booting VM is going throug

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread Ihar Hrachyshka
(Sorry Boris, now with correct CC list.) Boris Pavlovic wrote: Hi stackers, Intro --- It's not a big secret that OpenStack is huge and complicated ecosystem of different services that are working together to implement OpenStack API. For example booting VM is going through many projec

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread Dina Belova
Boris, I believe finishing work related to OSprofiler development is crucial for the teams like Performance Team kicked off during the Tokyo summit. I'll raise question is people are interested in taking part in its development tomorrow on IRC meeting

[Openstack-operators] How to install and use Barbican in Openstack

2015-11-09 Thread zhangjian2011
Hi, guys Can anyone share me some documents about installing and using Barbican in Openstack(Kilo)? Thanks. Regards, ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openst

[Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][tc][all][osprofiler] OSprofiler is dead, long live OSprofiler

2015-11-09 Thread Boris Pavlovic
Hi stackers, Intro --- It's not a big secret that OpenStack is huge and complicated ecosystem of different services that are working together to implement OpenStack API. For example booting VM is going through many projects and services: nova-api, nova-scheduler, nova-compute, glance-api, gl

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] Performance Team summit session results

2015-11-09 Thread Dina Belova
Folks, due to the doodle 3:00 - 4:00 UTC Tuesdays (starting from tomorrow) is ok for all voted people. Although for the US folks with PST time zone it'll be very early due to the time zone change happened for US on November, 1st. Still hope seeing yo

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] Performance Team summit session results

2015-11-09 Thread Dina Belova
Matt, thank you so much for covering [1], [2] and [3] points - I'll ping folks who've written these lines directly and will try to find out the answers. Cheers, Dina On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 10/29/2015 10:55 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > >> >> >> On 10/29/2