14:02:17 #startmeeting doctor 14:02:17 Meeting started Tue Nov 22 14:02:17 2016 UTC. The chair is r-mibu. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:02:17 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 14:02:17 The meeting name has been set to 'doctor' 14:02:27 #topic roll call 14:02:29 #info Carlos Goncalves 14:02:35 #info Yujun Zhang 14:02:59 #info Tomi Juvonen 14:03:07 #info Gerald 14:03:19 Yes, loud and clear 14:03:20 #info Ryota Mibu 14:03:27 #info Pedro Sousa 14:06:04 #link https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/24143/ 14:06:42 #info Host specific VMs list 14:09:31 #topic Q4 hackfest 14:10:05 #link https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/doctor_meetings 14:10:11 from line 40 14:11:29 #info yujunz and wenjuan will not attend hackfest, but Julien might attend 14:13:34 Aaron Smith according to the purple color 14:16:47 #topic Inspector design guideline 14:16:49 #info Larry Lamers 14:16:57 #info Tommy Lindgren 14:17:03 yujunz, seems like bit different color 14:17:15 He just typed in attendee 14:17:44 #link http://artifacts.opnfv.org/doctor/review/24143/design/index.html#document-inspector-design-guideline 14:18:02 #link https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/24143/ 14:19:15 #link https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-76 14:19:32 #link https://lists.opnfv.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2016-October/013036.html 14:27:12 #info r-mibu suspects that notifier may have taken most time of the whole doctor test 14:29:58 #info r-mibu suggests detail investigation may need to be done to see if there is alternative solution 14:31:55 #info r-mibu suggests that some improvement could be done in the message queue 14:35:44 #info yujunz suggests to detail the specific problem description in each bullet of guideline 14:37:01 #topic test code refactoring 14:37:44 # link https://github.com/openzero-zte/doctor_test_refactor 14:38:01 #link https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2016-November/013683.html 14:46:17 #info 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 14:46:32 I put it on etherpad 14:47:12 #info Carlos will share his thoughts via email (due to an issue his reply was not sent on the ML) 14:47:32 #info 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 14:48:47 #info 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. 14:51:36 #info r-mibu suggests submit the code and verify it with a non-voting job 14:52:05 #topic performance profiler 14:52:07 +2 on all of these notes 14:52:12 #link http://artifacts.opnfv.org/doctor/review/23963/scenarios/index.html#performance-profile 14:59:26 #info Aaron proposes to use standard terminology such as the ETSI FM cycle 14:59:52 agreement be several people to use ETSI terminologies 15:06:27 Yujun Zhang proposed doctor: Performance profiling specs https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/23963 15:09:03 #endmeeting