#opnfv-doctor: doctor

Meeting started by r-mibu at 14:02:17 UTC (full logs).

Meeting summary

  1. roll call (r-mibu, 14:02:27)
    1. Carlos Goncalves (cgoncalves, 14:02:29)
    2. Yujun Zhang (yujunz, 14:02:35)
    3. Tomi Juvonen (tojuvone, 14:02:59)
    4. Gerald (GeraldK, 14:03:07)
    5. Ryota Mibu (r-mibu, 14:03:20)
    6. Pedro Sousa (psous, 14:03:27)
    7. https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/24143/ (yujunz, 14:06:04)
    8. Host specific VMs list (yujunz, 14:06:42)

  2. Q4 hackfest (r-mibu, 14:09:31)
    1. https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/doctor_meetings (r-mibu, 14:10:05)
    2. yujunz and wenjuan will not attend hackfest, but Julien might attend (yujunz, 14:11:29)

  3. Inspector design guideline (r-mibu, 14:16:47)
    1. Larry Lamers (ljlamers, 14:16:49)
    2. Tommy Lindgren (tommyL, 14:16:57)
    3. http://artifacts.opnfv.org/doctor/review/24143/design/index.html#document-inspector-design-guideline (yujunz, 14:17:44)
    4. https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/24143/ (cgoncalves, 14:18:02)
    5. https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-76 (yujunz, 14:19:15)
    6. https://lists.opnfv.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2016-October/013036.html (yujunz, 14:19:32)
    7. r-mibu suspects that notifier may have taken most time of the whole doctor test (yujunz, 14:27:12)
    8. r-mibu suggests detail investigation may need to be done to see if there is alternative solution (yujunz, 14:29:58)
    9. r-mibu suggests that some improvement could be done in the message queue (yujunz, 14:31:55)
    10. yujunz suggests to detail the specific problem description in each bullet of guideline (yujunz, 14:35:44)

  4. test code refactoring (r-mibu, 14:37:01)
    1. https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2016-November/013683.html (r-mibu, 14:38:01)
    2. Gerald thinks the refactoring is going into the right direction, however, due to the other high prio tasks, suggests to delay this activity for a later release and for now focus on smaller changes to the existing scripts (GeraldK, 14:46:17)
    3. Carlos will share his thoughts via email (due to an issue his reply was not sent on the ML) (GeraldK, 14:47:12)
    4. Carlos: Definitely Python would be better to profile performance rather than Bash as we have at the moment. I propose that we work on this in parallel with the tests Bash code refactoring activity that is ongoing. Later on, still at Danube development time frame, we can make a decision of which one to use by default – although for that it would be required adding more verify jobs (2 tests branches (Bash and (GeraldK, 14:47:32)
    5. Yujun: Sounds like a good idea. +2 for parallel development on both bash and Python. In fact, it helps us to create reusable components such as sample inspector and sample monitor. (GeraldK, 14:48:47)
    6. r-mibu suggests submit the code and verify it with a non-voting job (yujunz, 14:51:36)

  5. performance profiler (r-mibu, 14:52:05)
    1. http://artifacts.opnfv.org/doctor/review/23963/scenarios/index.html#performance-profile (yujunz, 14:52:12)
    2. Aaron proposes to use standard terminology such as the ETSI FM cycle (GeraldK, 14:59:26)


Meeting ended at 15:09:03 UTC (full logs).

Action items

  1. (none)


People present (lines said)

  1. yujunz (17)
  2. r-mibu (12)
  3. GeraldK (7)
  4. cgoncalves (3)
  5. collabot` (3)
  6. tojuvone (1)
  7. psous (1)
  8. ljlamers (1)
  9. tommyL (1)
  10. OPNFV-Gerrit-Bot (1)
  11. dwj (1)


Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.