)]}'
{"specs/xena/approved/nova-audit.rst":[{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"2439e3ecdd2827dcf76e20ebd2f75d956b4f2359","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":72,"context_line":""},{"line_number":73,"context_line":"This task checks the consistency of allocations in Placement for"},{"line_number":74,"context_line":"instances in Nova. It has a runtime performance impact on both"},{"line_number":75,"context_line":"Placement and the Nova database. Many instances means this should"},{"line_number":76,"context_line":"probably check one instance per cycle, but potentially a short cycle"},{"line_number":77,"context_line":"time."},{"line_number":78,"context_line":""},{"line_number":79,"context_line":"``audit_allocations``"},{"line_number":80,"context_line":"---------------------"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"57efd6a1_284a5652","line":77,"range":{"start_line":75,"start_character":33,"end_line":77,"end_character":5},"updated":"2021-07-13 19:54:15.000000000","message":"i actully think that one instance per cycle makes less sense when its centralised in a nova-audit deamon\nbut that is an implemetnion detail i would probably make it configurable personally but there is a trade off in terms\nof responcsiveness and load.","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":4690,"name":"melanie witt","display_name":"melwitt","email":"melwittt@gmail.com","username":"melwitt"},"change_message_id":"dfb1c09571e10b3a5f6d03ae19c85bf4848c5041","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":72,"context_line":""},{"line_number":73,"context_line":"This task checks the consistency of allocations in Placement for"},{"line_number":74,"context_line":"instances in Nova. It has a runtime performance impact on both"},{"line_number":75,"context_line":"Placement and the Nova database. Many instances means this should"},{"line_number":76,"context_line":"probably check one instance per cycle, but potentially a short cycle"},{"line_number":77,"context_line":"time."},{"line_number":78,"context_line":""},{"line_number":79,"context_line":"``audit_allocations``"},{"line_number":80,"context_line":"---------------------"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"fa38142d_263d4134","line":77,"range":{"start_line":75,"start_character":33,"end_line":77,"end_character":5},"in_reply_to":"57efd6a1_284a5652","updated":"2021-07-14 00:11:07.000000000","message":"Agree it\u0027s an implementation detail and agree it should be configurable how many instances to check per interval.","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"2439e3ecdd2827dcf76e20ebd2f75d956b4f2359","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":128,"context_line":"database, both negative (while running) and positive (after"},{"line_number":129,"context_line":"running). Some people never run this, so a cycle time of once per day"},{"line_number":130,"context_line":"or week should be fine. This also needs a parameter to limit the scope"},{"line_number":131,"context_line":"of archived changes to a date range, defaulting to some multiple of"},{"line_number":132,"context_line":"the cycle time."},{"line_number":133,"context_line":""},{"line_number":134,"context_line":".. note:: This (and others) may need a configuration element to"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"aa446050_c572f93b","line":131,"range":{"start_line":131,"start_character":25,"end_line":131,"end_character":35},"updated":"2021-07-13 19:54:15.000000000","message":"really we should not use absolutes\n\nwe shoudl have a way to limit by a relitive time offset\n\ne.g. \u003e30 days\n\nif we just use a data range then you woudl have to update the config perodically","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"447c4153adf3ef6fd167e78291ef03d7fc25ebda","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":128,"context_line":"database, both negative (while running) and positive (after"},{"line_number":129,"context_line":"running). Some people never run this, so a cycle time of once per day"},{"line_number":130,"context_line":"or week should be fine. This also needs a parameter to limit the scope"},{"line_number":131,"context_line":"of archived changes to a date range, defaulting to some multiple of"},{"line_number":132,"context_line":"the cycle time."},{"line_number":133,"context_line":""},{"line_number":134,"context_line":".. note:: This (and others) may need a configuration element to"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"0e01928f_c5020857","line":131,"range":{"start_line":131,"start_character":25,"end_line":131,"end_character":35},"in_reply_to":"13ec9555_852e4dfa","updated":"2021-07-15 11:37:56.000000000","message":"yep just adding syntatic sugar works for me.\nwe dont need to change the internals we can jsut do the computation ourselves when invoking the existing logic +1","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":4690,"name":"melanie witt","display_name":"melwitt","email":"melwittt@gmail.com","username":"melwitt"},"change_message_id":"dfb1c09571e10b3a5f6d03ae19c85bf4848c5041","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":128,"context_line":"database, both negative (while running) and positive (after"},{"line_number":129,"context_line":"running). Some people never run this, so a cycle time of once per day"},{"line_number":130,"context_line":"or week should be fine. This also needs a parameter to limit the scope"},{"line_number":131,"context_line":"of archived changes to a date range, defaulting to some multiple of"},{"line_number":132,"context_line":"the cycle time."},{"line_number":133,"context_line":""},{"line_number":134,"context_line":".. note:: This (and others) may need a configuration element to"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"13ec9555_852e4dfa","line":131,"range":{"start_line":131,"start_character":25,"end_line":131,"end_character":35},"in_reply_to":"aa446050_c572f93b","updated":"2021-07-14 00:11:07.000000000","message":"Yeah, underneath the archive_deleted_rows and purge commands use dates and I don\u0027t think we should change that in a way that using a date no longer works, but rather we can add some syntactic sugar type of options where days can be specified \"90 days\" and then we do the math underneath to get the date to use.","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"2439e3ecdd2827dcf76e20ebd2f75d956b4f2359","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":143,"context_line":"``archive_deleted_rows`` operation. In reality, this should probably"},{"line_number":144,"context_line":"be run directly after the archival process, potentially with a"},{"line_number":145,"context_line":"different age scope."},{"line_number":146,"context_line":""},{"line_number":147,"context_line":"``heal_instance_mappings`` (proposed)"},{"line_number":148,"context_line":"-------------------------------------"},{"line_number":149,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"62d75602_4fcf0d25","line":146,"updated":"2021-07-13 19:54:15.000000000","message":"ack, i think age is the right concept there.\n\nwe shoudl supprot keeping the recored for N days/weeks/months and then removing them.\nideally that would be based on the relitive age rather then a range of dates.\n\ni would support \u003e,\u003d,\u003c for comparisone and h(our) d(ay) w(eek) m(onth)\n\n\nwe currenlty have a before optioni belive but the issue with that is you need to caulate the before date to use it which is anowying from a ux point of view.","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"447c4153adf3ef6fd167e78291ef03d7fc25ebda","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":143,"context_line":"``archive_deleted_rows`` operation. In reality, this should probably"},{"line_number":144,"context_line":"be run directly after the archival process, potentially with a"},{"line_number":145,"context_line":"different age scope."},{"line_number":146,"context_line":""},{"line_number":147,"context_line":"``heal_instance_mappings`` (proposed)"},{"line_number":148,"context_line":"-------------------------------------"},{"line_number":149,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"f9d38599_1017b560","line":146,"in_reply_to":"1ecaa749_eba4302d","updated":"2021-07-15 11:37:56.000000000","message":"lets just stick with days. it makes the math esier and avoids the months issue.\n\n\nif the underly code is based on dates not date times \nthen hours is also proably overkill \n\nwe can just allow you to say something like\n\narchive \u003c30 # archive row younger then 30 days\npurge \u003e60 # purge rows older then 60 days\n\nim not actuly sure if we would use or want younger so \nwe could remove the comparison operators \njust define arcive_age\u003d30 to mean archive things older then 30 days.\nand have a purge_age although the latter sounds like  movie plot.","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":4690,"name":"melanie witt","display_name":"melwitt","email":"melwittt@gmail.com","username":"melwitt"},"change_message_id":"dfb1c09571e10b3a5f6d03ae19c85bf4848c5041","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":143,"context_line":"``archive_deleted_rows`` operation. In reality, this should probably"},{"line_number":144,"context_line":"be run directly after the archival process, potentially with a"},{"line_number":145,"context_line":"different age scope."},{"line_number":146,"context_line":""},{"line_number":147,"context_line":"``heal_instance_mappings`` (proposed)"},{"line_number":148,"context_line":"-------------------------------------"},{"line_number":149,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"1ecaa749_eba4302d","line":146,"in_reply_to":"62d75602_4fcf0d25","updated":"2021-07-14 00:11:07.000000000","message":"I wouldn\u0027t want to allow \"months\" to be specified because that gets into how many days are there depending on what month it is. How about days/weeks only? Or do you have a suggestion about months?","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"},{"author":{"_account_id":9708,"name":"Balazs Gibizer","display_name":"gibi","email":"gibizer@gmail.com","username":"gibi"},"change_message_id":"830cdb21095909b39042c102c2d4545a4aff7504","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":210,"context_line":"---------------------"},{"line_number":211,"context_line":""},{"line_number":212,"context_line":"Deployers will have to learn about and deploy a new"},{"line_number":213,"context_line":"command/service. This will hopefully be completely offeset by the"},{"line_number":214,"context_line":"reduced complexity of managing and maintaining Nova in the longer"},{"line_number":215,"context_line":"term."},{"line_number":216,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"1df93f15_1102720a","line":213,"range":{"start_line":213,"start_character":51,"end_line":213,"end_character":58},"updated":"2021-07-13 15:47:28.000000000","message":"nit:offset","commit_id":"f542a0e920b94170ad72ec13369eb9748e49df35"}]}