Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-01-05
22:14:05 melwitt if it's a call, it would time out. but I'm guessing it's a cast
22:14:28 dansmith if it's a cast, let it pass
22:14:40 melwitt lol. I was wondering if you'd have something for that
22:14:56 dansmith if you wonder, let it plunder
22:15:04 melwitt oh boy ...
22:15:08 dtp but we still don't want this running in...whatever compute cells are called now?
22:15:25 dansmith dtp: it won't, that's api-only code
22:15:32 dtp oh, great
22:15:39 dansmith that's theconfusing part of cellsv1,
22:15:48 dansmith the api code is re-played in the compute cell
22:15:51 dansmith well, one of the confusing parts
22:15:58 dtp gotcha
22:16:25 dtp thanks, this helped
22:16:27 melwitt dansmith: I was just getting around to that. why is there a "if cell_type == 'api'" in there if it doesn't replay it? from what I see in nova/compute/cells_api.py it doesn't cast down to cells for delete
22:17:00 dansmith melwitt: I mean cellsv2 doesn't replay
22:17:28 melwitt dansmith: yeah, I'm looking in cells v1 and it looks like delete doesn't replay in a compute cell compute/api
22:17:35 melwitt guh
22:17:42 dtp that's what i was seeing as well
22:17:53 dansmith I'm lost
22:18:07 melwitt so I was wondering, why is there a "if cell_type == 'api'" in compute/api in the first place. maybe residue
22:18:41 melwitt or rather, it's really just saying "if this is cells v1, do this"
22:18:55 dansmith we definitely have to delete in both places in cellsv1 right?
22:19:23 dansmith I think we call delete in the compute cell and then it's replicated backwards in that case right?
22:19:28 dansmith the opposite of most calls
22:19:30 melwitt dansmith: from the code, it looks like it doesn't re-run the compute/api part in compute cells, is what I was observing. the use of the conditional made me think it was
22:19:41 dansmith melwitt: but the comment says it does right?
22:20:33 melwitt dansmith: it does. maybe it used to? unless I'm blind as I look in cells_api.py
22:21:57 dansmith well, we force a local delete in the api,
22:22:05 melwitt looks like the delete_everywhere will do a replay
22:22:08 dansmith then call direct to compute via rpc in there
22:22:09 melwitt but not the normal delete
22:22:17 dansmith ah
22:22:19 melwitt gawd
22:23:04 melwitt lol!
22:23:18 dtp :) so summary:
22:23:38 dtp no cell types in v2. ignore that if in there. just delete the tokens.
22:23:46 dtp with the conditional melwitt outlined above
22:23:54 dtp why even have the conditional if cells v1 is gone in ocata?
22:24:04 dansmith I would prefer it if we can avoid the conditional, but if we can't then yes
22:24:14 dansmith dtp: unfortunately cellsv1 will be with us for longer than that
22:24:27 dansmith dtp: until cellsv2 is a replacement and we have a migration path
22:24:43 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova: Remove the Allocation.create() method. https://review.openstack.org/416751
22:25:19 melwitt dtp: we can technically avoid the conditional because the delete_tokens rpc api is a cast i.e. broadcast that doesn't wait for a response. so it could just get sent anyway even if nothing will be there to listen to it
22:25:36 dansmith melwitt: what won't be there to listen for it?
22:25:41 dansmith melwitt: the instance having moved?
22:25:51 melwitt dansmith: the consoleauth service in compute cells
22:25:52 dansmith oh waiut
22:25:56 dansmith right, right
22:26:05 dansmith okay then you should do the conditional
22:26:12 dansmith IMHO of course
22:27:53 melwitt yeah, I hadn't thought of the possibility of just letting it run in compute cells and it not hurting anything
22:28:13 dansmith dtp: so, all good?
22:29:03 dtp i think so. thanks y'all
22:29:03 melwitt dansmith: wait, did you say do the conditional or did you mean don't do it?
22:29:32 dansmith melwitt: I mean _do_ the conditional so we're not just firing off a message into a queue that we know is unlistened to
22:29:40 melwitt yeah, okay
22:29:46 dansmith melwitt: I was originally thinking the reason for the conditional was something else
22:29:52 melwitt I was thinking you said the opposite
22:30:13 melwitt dtp: so yes on the conditional
22:30:46 dtp roger that
22:31:16 dansmith melwitt: remember when we told dtp this would be all easysauce? good times.
22:31:33 melwitt dansmith: yeah, I know. I keep wanting to apologize to him
22:31:36 melwitt sorry dtp
22:31:41 dtp hehe
22:31:57 dansmith it's like telling the driver to get into the other lane because it's faster and then getting stuck behind an accident or something
22:32:12 dansmith should'a kept quiet
22:32:18 melwitt haha
22:36:01 dtp you can make it up to be by having a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/336293/ :D
22:40:08 openstackgerrit OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/415978
22:40:39 melwitt dtp: hah, okay. hm, new config option
22:42:07 dtp yes :) it is a very, very exciting config option
22:43:23 mriedem yes i've already passively aggressively said this is a blueprint
22:44:16 dtp oh, sorry mriedem. should i create a blueprint?
22:44:39 mriedem well, see,
22:44:46 mriedem the thing i'm really going to say is this would be for pike
22:44:50 mriedem w/o wanting to hurt your feelings
22:45:14 mriedem that may be fine for you guys as i know godaddy would already be running with this patch and you're just upstreaming it
22:45:34 dtp yes
22:47:37 dtp so a pike blueprint?
22:48:17 mriedem yeah
22:48:27 dims mriedem : sdague : dansmith : i got a heat integration test going (devstack+python3.5), since it exercises nova, we can spot what we need to fix in nova too - http://logs.openstack.org/86/412486/17/check/gate-heat-dsvm-functional-convg-mysql-lbaasv2-ubuntu-xenial/960bacc/logs/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz
22:48:28 mriedem https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/pike
22:48:43 dtp thanks
22:48:56 mriedem dims: you know we don't have to officially care about py3 until pike right? :P
22:49:32 dims mriedem : haha, true, giving you a way to figure out, so it can proceed at a leisurely pace :)
22:49:47 openstackgerrit Derek Higgins proposed openstack/nova: Remove mox in libvirt destory tests https://review.openstack.org/417227
22:49:47 openstackgerrit Derek Higgins proposed openstack/nova: libvirt: fix nova can't delete the instance with nvram https://review.openstack.org/357190
22:49:56 mriedem i'm going to lean on you for all of this you know
22:49:58 mriedem you and gcb
22:51:58 dims mriedem : ack.
22:52:22 dims gcb : look there and start fixing :)
22:52:42 openstackgerrit OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/415978
22:53:38 mriedem dansmith: melwitt: before i head out, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/417206/ should fix the current CI failure mess
22:53:57 mriedem ooo looky there top check queue failure http://status.openstack.org//elastic-recheck/index.html
22:57:59 openstackgerrit Samantha Blanco proposed openstack/nova: Add missing CLI commands in support-matrix.ini https://review.openstack.org/417232
23:08:01 openstackgerrit Anusha Unnam proposed openstack/nova: Add post hook script to run tempest with old n-api https://review.openstack.org/401395
23:19:45 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova: api-ref: Fix a parameter in os-availability-zone.inc https://review.openstack.org/417233
#openstack-nova - 2017-01-06
00:25:30 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova-specs: Amend cold-migration-with-target-ocata spec https://review.openstack.org/397193
00:25:46 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova-specs: Abort Cold Migration https://review.openstack.org/334732
00:25:49 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova-specs: List/show all server migration types https://review.openstack.org/407237

Earlier   Later