[07:51:05] dcausse: good morning! Did you start a document on the Search Update Pipeline yet? [07:51:16] Otherwise, I'll start one and share it. [08:22:29] errand [08:26:51] gehel: no, not yet [08:27:29] I'll get one started [08:27:35] thanks! [08:34:16] gehel: looked over the api gateway for wdqs, looks good to me but I don't see a mention of the ui, I'm guessing that there will be need to better integrate that with the UI and I wonder if the gateway will have to provide some endpoints for this [08:37:06] similarly some questions about what to do with the current api endpoint but these questions could possibly be addressed at a later stage [08:43:17] My hope is that we can keep the existing endpoints and make this transparent for the UI. But this should be explicitly called out. [08:45:18] I thought that api gateway is behind "api.wikimedia.org" but there might be flexibility there [08:47:14] we might also want to close T290300 as a duplicate? [08:47:14] T290300: Serve WCQS Sparql endpoint through api.wikimedia.org with OAuth 2 - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T290300 [08:52:49] I would refer to Mike for closing that other one. Not sure how we want to communicate around all that. Might be tricky :) [09:19:12] No content yet, but Search Update Pipeline doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17tY05WoaT_BloTzaIncR939k3hvhcVQ-E-8DBjo284E/edit# [10:05:58] lunch [10:43:49] lunch [12:33:54] i'll make a comment and merge it [12:34:06] mpham: thanks! [12:51:12] greetings [12:54:53] o/ [12:56:01] o/ [13:17:28] Electrician replacing our smoke alarms this morning, will likely miss the first bit of weds meeting while that’s being finished [13:27:16] ryankemper: tanny411 will be working soon on extracting queries that can be used for monitoring. You two should probably get in touch about some of the details. [13:28:52] inflatador: I might be 2 minutes late, quick break between meetings [13:29:11] gehel ACK, take your time [13:39:57] meh cirrus docs have a "score" field [13:40:08] never seen this one before [13:40:39] given its shape it looks like the weekly page views signal [13:51:36] when looking at the doc building code everything is based on the page not the revision and seeing things like WikiPage::getTimestamp() that does loadLastEdit() makes me a bit nervous :) [14:00:30] inflatador, ryankemper: Olja might be asking you for some help for some access requests on the analytics cluster. All the SRE from Data Engineering are out at the moment :/ [14:35:40] OK, I don't know exactly what that entails, but happy to help [14:39:46] I'm not sure either. Once the request is in your hands, ping me if you need help to decipher it! [14:40:36] I suspect it is simply to create and merge a change to https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet/blob/production/modules/admin/data/data.yaml [15:03:50] ebernhardson: should be coming online around now, right? [15:04:09] or at least he normally does I think [15:04:25] cormacparle: we're in our usual Wednesday meeting. And Erik is there. [15:04:34] feel free to join! [16:02:21] going offline [16:03:39] workout, back in ~30 [16:24:41] dcausse: I think I've addressed all your comments in this patch string. Let me know if there is anything else I need to address: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/wikimedia-event-utilities/+/816746/ [18:49:04] lunch [18:55:33] somehow forgot to notify for workout return or lunch , back now! [19:42:20] back [20:41:00] ebernhardson ping me or ryan-kemper when you need those puppet patches merged [20:42:05] inflatador: sure, its https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/operations/puppet/+/817387 [20:53:32] ebernhardson OK merged [20:56:11] thanks [20:58:35] looks like we got a couple of streaming updater alerts [20:58:48] checking it out w https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata_Query_Service/Streaming_Updater#The_job_processing_latency_is_high [21:00:31] nm, looks like it fixed itself [21:04:25] seems to coincide with a large problem/recovery spam into -operations, i think what happens is these things talk to mediawiki and mediawiki had problems [21:08:47] yeah, I was thinking that too. Should we be concerned that the number of available task slots is still 0? [21:41:19] hmm, i have no clue :( (sorry wasn't looking in here) [21:41:33] i suspect 0 task slots is expected, but no great reason [21:41:39] or 0 available, at least