16:10:28 #startmeeting neutron northbound 16:10:28 Meeting started Fri Nov 6 16:10:28 2015 UTC. The chair is flaviof. Information about MeetBot at http://ci.openstack.org/meetbot.html. 16:10:28 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:10:28 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_northbound' 16:10:41 #chair john_a_joyce MisterS 16:10:41 Current chairs: MisterS flaviof john_a_joyce 16:11:19 as mentioned by john_a_joyce: "there are three main things: get the rewrite merged, get a test harness together to test it, figure out a sync strategy" 16:11:41 as mentioned by flaviof: "I think the seqnum solution is not going to cut it" 16:12:01 with respect to merge - Arvind had a few changes to do based on the discussion around database locking 16:12:25 +1 to the seq num not cutting it 16:12:49 wrt to "row locking", is that related to "rewrite merged" or "sync" ? 16:13:06 rewrite merged 16:13:09 ack 16:13:21 are these changes in gerrit? 16:13:39 yes 16:13:53 searching for them 16:14:00 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/222409/ Opendaylight driver refactor to handle out of sync issues 16:14:19 looks right? 16:14:57 flaviof, (sorry came in late) yes, that's the one 16:14:58 yes - that is correct 16:15:17 np 16:15:53 so other than the row locking issue discussed in Tokyo - are there any other concerns with that change set? 16:16:06 k, I'd definitely would propose we defer merging it till after Isaku is back. 16:16:30 sure - Arvind hasn't updated it yet anyway 16:16:49 to address the row locking 16:16:58 john_a_joyce : cool! 16:17:22 is there any way that changeset can be tested via tox? 16:17:39 ok - so unless some one has a concern I will check with Arvind about updating then we can try to merge when Isaku is back 16:17:46 yes, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/227941/ 16:17:57 sure - the unit tests are there 16:18:03 john_a_joyce +1 16:18:10 rcurran thanks 16:18:28 they just won't find the type of race conditions that got us into this mess to begin with 16:20:37 for the testing we will have to wait until Isaku's back as well, his team was taking the lead for that. 16:22:55 so that leaves full sync - to discuss 16:23:57 john_a_joyce agree. on that topic, I think it can be further split into 2 parts: 1) detect sync is needed and 2) doing the sync itself. 16:23:57 I think the concensus is that we should introduce a new API that can be polled by one of the sides 16:24:07 sure 16:24:35 I suspect we will find doing the sync can just be minor extensions to the new journal scheme 16:24:51 john_a_joyce agree 16:24:56 detecting the sync is need is the oen we haven't progesses much on 16:25:29 so what do we pass across the API to determine things are not out of sync? 16:25:34 yup. we went back and forth on the seqnum idea, which is definitely not too sound; and the create a hash idea 16:26:15 would a HASH of all the resource IDs be sufficient? 16:27:17 heh, if the approach is to have a full sync (not delta) that may be all that is needed 16:27:46 flaviof +1 16:28:47 does the neutron native objs give us a hash for free? or is that something odl will need to 'bolt on'? 16:28:54 but for efficiency we would want a hash function that provides the dame result regardless of the order the IDs are hashed 16:30:15 let me say that different - the hash function MUST be independent of order - because we can't guarantee object order across multiple server processes 16:31:08 for efficiency it would be nice that the function can also be incrementally calculated as objects are added and deleted 16:32:42 so I think the next step is to bring a proposal that describes the hash function 16:33:34 john_a_joyce make sense. it should account for versioning or a way of purge the journal as obj changes 16:33:54 obj changes (attribs added/removed) 16:36:39 I will try to have a proposal for next week to share 16:36:57 unless someone else already has some thoughts in the works 16:37:19 john_a_joyce sounds good; no I have not thought about this any further. 16:38:31 I have one question on this, would these sync changes be restricted to just ML2 driver? 16:38:42 so, in summary: see about wrapping up and merge db journal changes+tests; and then 'rehash' how we detect out of sync 16:39:16 or is the plan to make it sort of framework that can be used for rest of code like l3, lbaas, bgpvpn, lwgw [which are coming up] 16:39:26 vthapar definitely not; l3, sec groups, vpn... all need to be accounted for as well and they are not ml2. 16:39:54 okay, just wanted to be sure. 16:40:19 in brief, anything that networking-odl tell odl needs to be accounted under this scope 16:40:21 all agree? 16:40:32 rcurran has a change set in progress for L3 16:40:32 flaviof, so you don't think we should use this journal infrastruture for other neutron events? 16:40:37 l3? 16:41:06 flabiof +1 16:41:15 flaviof, i'm not referring to the hash discussion. just the new interface from neutron -> ODL controller 16:41:16 flaviof +1 16:41:26 rcurran i'm hoping that the journal is not only servicing ml2, but all others 16:41:37 flaviof, ok 16:42:22 flaviof, misread your first comment :-) 16:42:54 rcurran np 16:43:40 anything else we want to talk about? otherwise we can wrap it for today 16:46:59 not from me 16:47:29 #topic cookies 16:47:33 #endmeeting