| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-01-26 | |||
| 23:41:01 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova: api-ref: Fix parameters and examples in aggregate API https://review.openstack.org/425512 | |
| 23:41:13 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova: api-ref: Add parameters in cold migrate action https://review.openstack.org/410042 | |
| 23:41:28 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova: Add functional tests for cold migration to same host https://review.openstack.org/414926 | |
| 23:43:57 | mriedem | claudiub: got the pci pass through one approved | |
| 23:47:45 | claudiub | mriedem: \o/ Time to party! :D | |
| 23:54:54 | sfinucan | mriedem: Anything else I need to look at before I log off for the night? | |
| 23:55:06 | mriedem | sfinucan: nope | |
| 23:55:16 | mriedem | sfinucan: everything else is in the gate or being watched by me and dan | |
| 23:55:28 | sfinucan | mriedem: Sweet. Cheers :) | |
| 23:55:32 | mriedem | thanks, later | |
| 23:55:44 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1659215 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Should not allow assign floating IPs that are already assigned to another port" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Zhenyu Zheng (zhengzhenyu) | |
| 23:55:44 | mlavalle | mriedem: you may want to take a look at this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1659215 | |
| 23:55:58 | mriedem | mlavalle: bugs are the last thing i want to look at right now | |
| 23:56:28 | mlavalle | mriedem: cool, I'll mark it invalid and you can take a look later | |
| 23:56:40 | mriedem | mlavalle: well, i'll forget, | |
| 23:56:50 | mriedem | but if it's a big deal, or controversial, or whatever, just start a ML thread about it | |
| 23:57:42 | mlavalle | mriedem: it's not. i'll take care of it. I just wanted a Nova team memeber to take a quick look. But I understand you are too busy now | |
| 23:58:12 | mlavalle | mriedem: unless I yell for help, you can forget about it :-) | |
| #openstack-nova - 2017-01-27 | |||
| 00:07:31 | openstackgerrit | Eric Brown proposed openstack/nova: Add RPC version aliases for Ocata https://review.openstack.org/425958 | |
| 00:07:33 | mriedem | looks like that grenade change is happy now | |
| 00:07:41 | mriedem | at least for single-node | |
| 00:17:39 | mriedem | echo "Expecting $expected computes" | |
| 00:17:39 | mriedem | dansmith: so the multinode grenade job passed with your change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/424730/10/projects/60_nova/resources.sh but i don't see this in the logs | |
| 00:19:37 | mriedem | oh hrm http://logs.openstack.org/30/424730/10/check/gate-grenade-dsvm-neutron-multinode-ubuntu-xenial/9a57ab4/logs/grenade.sh.txt.gz#_2017-01-26_23_58_11_661 | |
| 00:19:43 | mriedem | Expecting 0 computes | |
| 00:19:48 | mriedem | Found 2 computes | |
| 00:23:47 | openstackgerrit | Jaivish Kothari(janonymous) proposed openstack/os-vif: Fix broken Link https://review.openstack.org/425994 | |
| 00:24:21 | mriedem | http://logs.openstack.org/30/424730/10/check/gate-grenade-dsvm-neutron-multinode-ubuntu-xenial/9a57ab4/logs/grenade_save/grenade_db.ini | |
| 00:24:27 | mriedem | nova_compute_count = 0 | |
| 00:36:36 | openstackgerrit | Jaivish Kothari(janonymous) proposed openstack/os-vif: Removing Deprecated hacking Check https://review.openstack.org/425996 | |
| 00:46:52 | dansmith | mriedem: greeat | |
| 00:48:07 | mriedem | it's weird b/c it finds the 2 in the verify step | |
| 00:48:09 | mriedem | but not before it | |
| 00:48:23 | mriedem | but we're creating resources so we should have 2 computes | |
| 00:52:54 | alex_xu | mriedem: I'm already in vacation. But I think I have better to give you a update. The servers filter BP already merged the filter and sort part. For the policy rule change didn't merge yet, johnthetubaguy pointed out that changing a rule enforcement from a hard to soft should bump microversion. | |
| 00:53:03 | alex_xu | mriedem: and gmann works on it https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/add-whitelist-for-server-list-filter-sort-parameters | |
| 00:54:43 | alex_xu | mriedem: that probably needs two patch, one is about the rename of the policy rule, then change the hard to soft by microversion. I'm not sure whether it can get FFE. That should be your call | |
| 00:55:08 | alex_xu | mriedem: or you want something detail, I can write a email | |
| 00:55:50 | gmann | mriedem: as alex_xu said. i will try to push microversion patch (max over weekend) also and then you can take call on that | |
| 00:56:07 | alex_xu | gmann: thanks | |
| 00:57:13 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1658571 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Microversion 2.37 break 2.32 usage" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Artom Lifshitz (notartom) | |
| 00:57:13 | alex_xu | gmann: mriedem another thing is worth to track is this bug https://launchpad.net/bugs/1658571 | |
| 00:57:38 | gmann | alex_xu: mriedem i updates the spec with latest discusion, if you guys can have a look - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/425533/ | |
| 00:59:07 | alex_xu | gmann: let me check now | |
| 00:59:16 | gmann | alex_xu: about your comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/415330/25/nova/policy.py | |
| 00:59:57 | alex_xu | gmann: yea | |
| 01:00:08 | gmann | alex_xu: that if condition is when policy file is updated right? for example say if old deployer has policy file(with old rule overridden) and do not change file then also it hit if condition ? | |
| 01:01:02 | mriedem | alex_xu: gmann: a ML thread on the sort/filters policy thing is probably best | |
| 01:01:05 | mriedem | i'm leaving soon for dinner | |
| 01:01:54 | alex_xu | gmann: it only happened when the policy file changed. the olso.policy will check timestamp of policy file, then it will reload the file. Then you will pass that if condition | |
| 01:02:03 | alex_xu | mriedem: got it | |
| 01:02:36 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1658571 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Microversion 2.37 break 2.32 usage" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Artom Lifshitz (notartom) | |
| 01:02:36 | mriedem | for https://launchpad.net/bugs/1658571 we said we'd fix it after FF as a bug fix, but that was before i was reminded that we only have 1 week until rc1 | |
| 01:03:01 | gmann | mriedem: +1 | |
| 01:03:10 | alex_xu | mriedem: 1 week from now? | |
| 01:03:15 | mriedem | alex_xu: yeah | |
| 01:03:25 | alex_xu | ok, got it | |
| 01:03:29 | mriedem | so, that one might end up waiting until pike | |
| 01:03:34 | mriedem | since it was already broken in newton | |
| 01:03:40 | mriedem | we might just have to document it for ocata | |
| 01:03:56 | alex_xu | ok | |
| 01:04:22 | mriedem | i've tagged the bug with ocata-rc-potential though so we don't forget about it | |
| 01:04:30 | alex_xu | cool | |
| 01:04:36 | gmann | it looks pretty close if we can get in Ocata only but yea let's not hurry on that may be | |
| 01:04:48 | alex_xu | gmann: +1 | |
| 01:05:02 | gmann | alex_xu: but for old deployer timestamp will not be changed right? | |
| 01:05:25 | gmann | alex_xu: where we can see those warning so that we can verify the same | |
| 01:05:59 | alex_xu | gmann: emm...they should get a warning after upgrade, due to 'saved_file_rules' is empty | |
| 01:07:00 | gmann | alex_xu: ah yea, thats is nice point | |
| 01:16:32 | artom | mriedem, is one week really too little? | |
| 01:16:51 | artom | I've addressed gmann's and alex_xu's feedback :) | |
| 01:17:14 | gmann | artom: +1, ll try to check today. m sure that is very close | |
| 01:17:52 | artom | The patch itself is fairly straightforward, if discussion is needed I think it's more about the strategy | |
| 01:18:04 | mriedem | artom: w/o looking at the change i can't really say | |
| 01:18:12 | mriedem | artom: we should have a spec for the thing too since it's a new microversion right? | |
| 01:18:14 | artom | My understanding is that a new microversion is the prefered approach | |
| 01:18:19 | mriedem | yes it is | |
| 01:18:44 | artom | mriedem, a spec for that seems... pulled by the hair, as we say in Quebec | |
| 01:19:01 | artom | But if folks want, I'll hack one up :) | |
| 01:19:07 | mriedem | artom: let them eat process | |
| 01:20:00 | artom | mriedem, although if we do a spec, there's no chance of it landing in ocata? | |
| 01:20:13 | mriedem | there is | |
| 01:21:09 | mriedem | artom: fwiw, | |
| 01:21:17 | mriedem | https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/implemented/response-for-invalid-status.html was for a bug fix that required a microversion in newton | |
| 01:21:26 | mriedem | it should be a relatively small and straight-forward spec | |
| 01:21:34 | mriedem | just like ^ | |
| 01:21:46 | artom | mriedem, PRECEDENT!!11 | |
| 01:23:04 | mriedem | yar | |
| 01:29:25 | edleafe | mriedem_afk: almost done with the fixes | |
| 01:56:03 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova: placement: RT now adds proper Ironic inventory https://review.openstack.org/404472 | |
| 01:56:06 | edleafe | ^^ and there they are | |
| 02:03:06 | diana_clarke | I have what is probably a stupid question... when I do a `ps aux | grep nova-api` I don't see the nova-api-metadata service, but I can still successfully query the metadata service... why? | |
| 02:06:05 | diana_clarke | (asking b/c I'm looking at the # of processes started when you change osapi_compute_workers vs. metadata_workers in the nova conf) | |
| 02:08:32 | dansmith | diana_clarke: http://logs.openstack.org/30/424730/10/check/gate-grenade-dsvm-neutron-ubuntu-xenial/e3caf96/logs/etc/nova/nova.conf.txt.gz | |
| 02:08:52 | dansmith | diana_clarke: runs them both in a single process | |
| 02:09:01 | dansmith | (he said authoritatively, despite being a little fuzzy on that stuff) | |
| 02:09:30 | dansmith | diana_clarke: enabled_apis = osapi_compute,metadata | |
| 02:09:50 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova-specs: Fix tag attribute disappearing https://review.openstack.org/426030 | |
| 02:12:42 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova-specs: Fix tag attribute disappearing https://review.openstack.org/426030 | |
| 02:22:24 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: Pass APIVersionRequest to extentions https://review.openstack.org/425876 | |