Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-01-23
13:42:29 openstackgerrit Claudiu Belu proposed openstack/nova: hyper-v: Do not allow instances with pinned CPUs to spawn https://review.openstack.org/424116
13:47:18 sfinucan lyarwood: Done and done https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418371/1
13:47:45 sfinucan johnthetubaguy: ^ that looks like a straightforward +W - could you take a glance if you have a moment?
13:49:13 lyarwood sfinucan: cheers
13:50:22 bhagyashris cdent: I know , i am asking lot of questions :) I just want to know if we are using the placement apis then will compute node table be needed in that case? If it will used then in which case it will be used and for what?
13:51:29 diga jaypipes: Hi
13:51:31 johnthetubaguy sfinucan: ack, thanks
13:51:31 cdent bhagyashris: it will carry on being used for keeping track of the compute nodes because nova still needs to know about them
13:51:51 cdent diga: jaypipes is on PTO, maybe somebody else can help?
13:52:04 diga cdent: Hi, sure
13:52:20 diga cdent: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/423872/ can you review this spec - placement notification
13:53:09 cdent yeah, sure, will stick that on my list for today
13:54:22 diga cdent: :) thank you!
13:54:31 diga cdent: we have meeting now right ?
13:54:36 cdent yeah, in five minutes
13:55:00 diga okay
13:55:04 edleafe diga: in #openstack-meeting-alt
13:55:21 diga edleafe: Sure, will join
13:56:07 andreykurilin amrith: hi
13:56:23 amrith hi andreykurilin
13:56:33 amrith did you see the email I just sent you
13:56:47 andreykurilin yes
13:56:50 johnthetubaguy bauzas: you say only ironic needs the host field, isn't that what we use for the RPC call?
13:57:05 amrith the issue I'm facing is that if I use the v6.0.0 client things work fine
13:57:15 amrith if I switch to the v7.0.0 client, it bombs out
13:57:21 bauzas johnthetubaguy: I meant the problem is that host != node for Ironic
13:57:23 johnthetubaguy bauzas: or is that the node vs host thing
13:57:29 amrith am not sure why that would be the case
13:57:29 bauzas yup that
13:57:30 johnthetubaguy bauzas: ah, gotcha
13:57:36 bauzas maybe my comment is unclear, sorry if so
13:57:38 andreykurilin amrith: I have just several minutes before meeting and will able to help you in ~30 minutes
13:57:48 bauzas but I can't say that I could just use the RP name
13:58:01 bauzas given it's the nodename which can be different for ironic
13:58:05 amrith andreykurilin, I'll be here.
13:58:13 andreykurilin amrith: but now I have one question: What is user.tenant https://github.com/openstack/trove/blob/master/trove/tests/util/__init__.py#L170 here? Is it tenant name or id?
13:58:23 bauzas while the other drivers (except the Fake driver, but that's fixed in a bottom patch) are using host == node
13:58:29 bauzas johnthetubaguy: ^
13:58:31 amrith looking
13:59:56 johnthetubaguy bauzas: the custom resource class stuff should fix that, I am assuming
14:00:13 bauzas johnthetubaguy: yeah, but it could be merged by Pike
14:00:23 bauzas johnthetubaguy: hence me using the new object method I created
14:00:44 bauzas we could just cut that once the above BP you mentioned is fully merged
14:01:00 bauzas but AFAICS, that's still not done yet hence my big fat comment
14:01:14 johnthetubaguy bauzas: yeah, no biggie, just getting my head straight on that
14:01:40 bauzas np
14:01:55 bauzas johnthetubaguy: I have a bigger concern that I wrote in a ML thread this week-end
14:02:03 edleafe bauzas: scheduler meeting?
14:02:11 bauzas edleafe: I can do, for 20 mins
14:02:21 edleafe cool
14:02:23 amrith andreykurilin, one second, you are looking at the tests. I wasn't running test code
14:02:32 bauzas edleafe: but I'm pretty down given all the work I'm doing atm
14:02:33 andreykurilin ok...
14:02:34 amrith I was running a straight trove command which tried to hit nova
14:02:42 amrith I will find out what that is
14:02:58 andreykurilin I just look at first failure at gates:)
14:03:01 andreykurilin *looked
14:03:12 amrith but for what I've been trying to do, the code is at https://github.com/openstack/trove/blob/master/trove/common/remote.py#L101
14:03:17 amrith ah, sorry
14:03:27 amrith I am running trove locally to debug
14:03:38 amrith here, we're making a client with version 2.12
14:03:58 amrith which comes from https://github.com/openstack/trove/blob/master/trove/common/cfg.py#L67
14:04:05 amrith and we're passing in a bunch of parameters
14:04:23 amrith my specific issue (and like I said in the email, trove may be doing something wrong here)
14:04:33 amrith we're making the call like https://github.com/openstack/trove/blob/master/trove/common/remote.py#L101
14:04:49 amrith and if I understand compatibility right, this should work unchanged with the v7.0.0 client from nova
14:04:51 amrith but it isn't
14:04:51 andreykurilin amrith: need to go to meeting, sorry. PS: it should help(with depends-on) ttps://review.openstack.org/412497
14:05:09 amrith nope, doesn't help
14:05:15 amrith tried it
14:05:36 amrith something else is broken, not sure where
14:05:51 amrith the issue I'm facing is that nova returns a 403 (forbidden) on a simple thing like flavor list
14:05:54 andreykurilin amrith: I added depends-on there
14:06:17 bhagyashris cdent: Ok. Thank you. :)
14:06:21 andreykurilin amrith: did you check it with pulling not-merged changed from novcliane?
14:06:25 amrith oh, sorry
14:06:27 amrith different change
14:06:30 amrith let me look
14:06:43 amrith NO, I did not check with pulling not merged change in novaclient
14:06:48 amrith that may be it. let me check
14:06:53 amrith catch yo after your meeting
14:06:54 amrith thanks!
14:07:34 alex_xu johnthetubaguy: sdague, hope you can take a look at this patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/423952/5, we break some old microversion in newton release. cdent have a good point on it. I'm not sure we can fix it directly, maybe another microversion?
14:08:20 johnthetubaguy alex_xu: yeah, sounds like it should be added back in a the next microversion
14:10:04 alex_xu johnthetubaguy: yea, we already bump few versions after break that.
14:14:13 sdague alex_xu: so, before fixing it, is there something we can learn about how to not let something like that fall through review again?
14:15:05 sdague no one seemed to catch that over a lot of review iterations (64 revisions on that patch, that bug showed up in revision 44)
14:15:13 sdague https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304510/44/nova/api/openstack/compute/block_device_mapping.py
14:15:43 openstack Launchpad bug 1658148 in OpenStack Dashboard (Horizon) "Horizon/Nova interactions broken " [Critical,New] - Assigned to Rob Cresswell (robcresswell)
14:15:43 diana_clarke amrith, andreykurilin: Horizon is reporting a similar issue with python-novaclient 7.0.0. https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-novaclient/+bug/1658148
14:16:04 alex_xu sdague: i'm thinking is there any test can cover that. we probably only run the test on specific version, not in the future version.
14:17:28 alex_xu but even the test can run in the future version, but the bug only can be found when we bump a new version
14:18:56 sdague alex_xu: right, I was wonder if we could iterate through the schema and compare at various versions
14:19:13 sdague including a fake new version after the one being committed
14:19:23 sdague and if we see a blip and back, that's probably wrong
14:19:24 andreykurilin amrith: ok, I returned
14:19:51 bauzas jaypipes: I thought you were on PTO
14:19:59 alex_xu sdague: yea, that should works
14:20:46 alex_xu sdague: actually that patch fixes two bugs, another one break the old microversion in the later patch.
14:21:59 alex_xu maybe we should run the api sample tests on the specific version and the lastest version. it is fine to find bug before we bump next version

Earlier   Later