16:01:17 #startmeeting metrics team 16:01:17 Meeting started Thu Mar 28 16:01:17 2019 UTC. The chair is karsten. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:17 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:01:31 - TorDNSEL (karsten) 16:01:36 haskell. 16:01:47 so, I made progress. 16:01:58 that is better than expected (: 16:01:59 but I can't really say how much is left to do. 16:02:13 I had help. :) 16:02:31 so i said to ln5 earlier today, that i'm not sure which of the two solutions would be ready first 16:02:39 yeah. 16:03:02 and both have their own risks. 16:03:18 these haskell fixes might turn out to compile and work okay in most cases but not all. 16:03:40 the rewrite might work fine for the cases we thought about, but not for the cases that tup thought about long ago and that we forgot. 16:03:41 right 16:04:19 so, I guess that neither of the two solutions will be ready by end of this week. 16:04:46 i don't think i'll be making any progress this week, i have lots of admin stuff to catch up on 16:04:57 makes sense. 16:05:16 I think I'd want to continue with the haskell upgrade project until I feel I'm not making any progress anymore. 16:05:33 it would be great to run both systems in paralell for a while if we can 16:05:39 true! 16:06:01 how about we ask ln5 for mid-april as new deadline? 16:06:22 how many points is that? 16:06:34 hmmmmmm 16:07:08 it's been a while since I last looked at the roadmap. (when is gaba back?...) 16:07:09 ideally we would have 8 points, but could probably live with 5 16:07:47 i don't know how many you think you might need for the haskell work though 16:08:01 and we lose the ability to run both systems together if we don't do the haskell work before the cutoff 16:08:49 this is hard to express in points. 16:09:10 in theory, we could define an upper limit and stop the work, regardless of success or not. 16:09:40 but estimating how much work there is to do is impossible for me. 16:09:50 I mean, I don't understand most of what the code does. 16:10:36 hm ok 16:10:52 so, 16:11:01 my points estimates are based on what i estimated in the roadmap but may not actually be accurate 16:11:18 how about we keep working on this for another week, in parallel. 16:11:32 sounds good, then we can see how things look 16:11:45 yes. 16:11:53 we have a few alternatives, though. 16:12:06 we could run the current code on squeeze if we want to have a second instance. 16:12:11 on our own squeeze, that is. 16:12:33 and if everything falls apart, we might survive without a running instance, even if that'd be sad. 16:13:11 but let's see how things evolve until next thursday. 16:13:17 ok 16:13:22 it's great that the sponsor 13 work is done, by the way. 16:13:26 that was really important! 16:13:40 yes (: 16:13:43 so, I think it's okay that we didn't complete this tordnsel thing on schedule. 16:14:17 ah, regarding the haskell upgrade: do we know anybody in tor who writes haskell? 16:14:34 or wrote? or has been less active lately? somebody who I could ping? 16:15:04 i don't know of anyone 16:15:29 okay. 16:15:49 alright, moving on? 16:15:58 ok 16:16:02 - Performance measurements/analysis (karsten) 16:16:12 I think we'll have another meeting next week. 16:16:32 or at least we said in the meeting three weeks ago that we'll have another one four weeks later. 16:17:11 would you be able to upgrade the tor versions on the op-* instances until then? 16:17:34 mostly to show that we're making progress. 16:17:40 along with the tickets I created. 16:17:50 possibly 16:18:28 ok. 16:18:49 is this to move them to a stable version? 16:18:56 do we know what version we want to test? 16:19:03 something recent. 16:19:08 i guess that the current "whatever is head of master" is wrong 16:19:10 maybe what's shipped in debian? 16:19:19 yes, that's very recent. 16:19:42 you're building from source? 16:20:22 it is built from source currently 16:20:30 but i want to change it to use system tor instead from deb pkg 16:20:45 the decision is whether we use the long-term stable in debian archives, or latest stable in deb.tpo 16:20:48 I don't feel strongly which exact version. but it would be good not to have to argue whether an issue also exists in recent tor versions or not. 16:21:10 let's do the deb.tpo one then 16:21:11 whichever is easier. 16:21:16 IMO. 16:21:26 basically the same 16:21:31 ok. 16:21:51 sounds good. 16:22:02 moving on? 16:22:05 acute: did you want to say anything on onionperf? 16:22:12 ah. 16:22:19 hi 16:22:24 hi! 16:23:04 just that we can currently close some more bugs 16:23:22 sounds great! :) 16:23:35 also, I've updated the deployment instructions in case you want to also update the op instances themselves 16:23:56 this will allow you to measure v3 services also 16:24:19 neat! 16:24:23 how does the scheduling work there? 16:24:33 does it round-robin between public, v2, and v3? 16:24:40 yes, exactly 16:24:45 we might need to make changes to how we do stats for the output for that one 16:24:55 i guess we have some regex of .onion and now we need to look at length 16:25:12 right. but that's easy. still good to keep in mind. ;) 16:25:23 any reason not to add v3 now? 16:25:36 or maybe on one instance? 16:26:09 acute: are you running a test instance? 16:26:10 do you happen to have a .tpf file with v2 and v3 measurements? 16:26:26 yes, but currently only measuring bridges 16:26:46 ah - also for v3 you need a backported version of stem (1.7) 16:26:54 yes, can provide this 16:27:04 just for the regex. 16:27:16 can you email me that, or put it on a ticket somewhere? 16:27:25 yep will email you 16:27:30 great! 16:27:38 :) 16:28:32 what do you think about deploying on one instance? 16:28:52 maybe next week or so. 16:29:14 acute: do you think it's stable enough to set it up on op-ab? 16:29:24 yes, I do 16:29:34 ok let's do that 16:29:48 isn't there an end-of-month thing regarding funding? 16:30:02 would it make sense to deploy before end of month in order to include it in a report somewhere? 16:30:20 excellent point 16:31:25 okay, I can make sure that metrics-web doesn't choke on the v3 measurements tonight. 16:31:39 the .tpf file will help with that. 16:32:16 cool! moving on to the next topic? 16:32:22 ok 16:32:29 - Next meeting time (karsten) 16:32:50 next week clocks will change again. 16:33:23 maybe for the last time 16:33:33 I could do this meeting at the same UTC time. but it might collide with another meeting then. 16:33:42 unclear if for the last time. :( 16:33:52 but what's certain in politics... 16:34:20 I'll learn more about the other meeting's time today. how about we talk about maybe moving this meeting time via email? 16:34:32 that sounds good, i'm thinking i don't know about other meetings 16:35:05 okay. 16:35:19 the next two topics are gaba topics. 16:35:22 or at least require gaba. 16:35:57 we could try signal and ask her. 16:36:03 sounds good 16:36:29 alright! 16:36:34 out of topics? 16:36:55 no more from me 16:37:09 great! 16:37:30 thanks, and have a good evening! bye! 16:37:32 bye! 16:37:41 #endmeeting