| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-01-27 | |||
| 17:46:00 | cdent | jroll: which is great, but there's something in the middle: more functional testing while we are developing the features (just setting a bit for future efforts, not moaning) | |
| 17:46:40 | jroll | cdent: sure, don't disagree | |
| 17:47:46 | cdent | jroll: shit bro, it's not you who I think should have done functional tests on this stuff. It's me and figleaf and jaypipes | |
| 17:48:33 | jroll | cdent: heh. it's all of us. I just want to help get this working | |
| 17:49:12 | cdent | figleaf: are you working on dealing with the traceback jroll's reported, or should I do that? | |
| 17:49:21 | jroll | figleaf: okay, that worked, now I should see an inventory record that is mapped to that custom resource class, yeah? | |
| 17:49:53 | figleaf | jroll: sorry, I'm looking at 6 different bits of code, trying to keep them straight :( | |
| 17:50:06 | figleaf | jroll: what was it that you were doing when you hit the bug | |
| 17:50:07 | figleaf | ? | |
| 17:50:23 | cdent | traceback on the review | |
| 17:50:30 | jroll | figleaf: so I've got devstack. ironic stuff has resource classes. using this code. | |
| 17:50:40 | jroll | fixed traceback as mentioned (leaving a comment on that now) | |
| 17:51:02 | jroll | looks like things go through but I don't see anything in inventory table that references the custom RP | |
| 17:51:07 | jroll | er, s/RP/RC/ | |
| 17:56:55 | figleaf | jroll: ugh - looks like there are more of those all over the place | |
| 18:01:01 | cdent | figleaf, jroll, johnthetubaguy: sorry guys I gotta go. I haven't eaten enough and starting to fade badly. If there's something I can do on sunday or in the UK morning monday, let me know, either by email to os-dev or direct to me. | |
| 18:02:01 | jroll | cdent: no worries man, I'll just leave anything I find on gerrit | |
| 18:02:09 | jroll | looks like it submits inventory correctly | |
| 18:02:10 | johnthetubaguy | cdent: figleaf: I am going to run soon too, similar comments about monday morning | |
| 18:02:28 | cdent | best of luck | |
| 18:02:42 | johnthetubaguy | jroll: well, not sure, once we get bauzas's change in, you will no longer be able to pick iroinc nodes if the current proposal merges | |
| 18:02:59 | johnthetubaguy | figleaf: I attempted to add a summary comment about what I think we should do | |
| 18:03:02 | jroll | johnthetubaguy: ... O_o | |
| 18:03:09 | figleaf | johnthetubaguy: cdent: ok, thanks for opening up this can of worms! (Seriously! It would have really sucked to let this out like this) | |
| 18:03:50 | johnthetubaguy | there may be 40% nonsense in my current suggestion, but lets see if that makes things clearer or not | |
| 18:05:17 | jroll | johnthetubaguy: lgtm, I think | |
| 18:06:22 | johnthetubaguy | figleaf: are you on board with the plan I sketched out in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/404472? | |
| 18:13:21 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova: Scheduler calling the Placement API https://review.openstack.org/417961 | |
| 18:13:53 | figleaf | johnthetubaguy: sorry, working on a different fix atm. Looking now... | |
| 18:14:22 | johnthetubaguy | figleaf: so as I understood it, this is one of the two remaining FFEs, hence my focus on it | |
| 18:14:58 | jroll | fwiw I'm just getting lost in this code at this point | |
| 18:15:12 | figleaf | johnthetubaguy: I was thinking similarly - getting rid of the cleanup of old-style inventory | |
| 18:15:23 | figleaf | jroll: welcome to the club!! | |
| 18:16:05 | figleaf | johnthetubaguy: and trying to ensure that both old- and new-style can coexist | |
| 18:16:40 | figleaf | johnthetubaguy: and then add back the cleanup in Pike, remove it in Queens | |
| 18:16:54 | johnthetubaguy | figleaf: cool, yeah, I think we just report the new resources, for the first step | |
| 18:17:39 | johnthetubaguy | figleaf: yeah, the clean up can only be added after we start scheduling and claiming using the new resource class, I think, we can probably drop reporting the old ones at that point, but not 100% sure | |
| 18:18:30 | johnthetubaguy | actually the scheduling can happen first, then we can start claiming the new style, then we drop reporting the legacy resource classes | |
| 18:18:38 | johnthetubaguy | I think | |
| 18:23:51 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova: Avoid redundant call to update_resource_stats from RT https://review.openstack.org/424305 | |
| 18:41:44 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova: placement: RT now adds proper Ironic inventory https://review.openstack.org/404472 | |
| 18:42:30 | figleaf | ^^ This just fixes the client bugs jroll found | |
| 19:15:41 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova: Added instance.reboot.error to the legacy notifications https://review.openstack.org/411816 | |
| 19:29:26 | bauzas | superdan: johnthetubaguy: I'm now in the train back to Grenoble, what's the current situation for the scheduler change? | |
| 19:30:17 | superdan | bauzas: sdague wants the grenade change refactored, so I'm working on that | |
| 19:30:32 | superdan | bauzas: the scheduler thing passed multinode grenade before I started, johnthetubaguy was going to fix up the pep8 and unit tests | |
| 19:31:38 | bauzas | okay, thanks for both you | |
| 19:31:52 | bauzas | the pep8 issue is really easy | |
| 19:32:08 | bauzas | not sure I understand an unittest problem | |
| 19:32:08 | sdague | superdan: yeh, the placement add patch seems good now, pending tests | |
| 19:32:25 | superdan | sdague: I think it's still not working yet, but getting closer | |
| 19:32:36 | sdague | superdan: ok | |
| 19:32:48 | superdan | bauzas: see all the red FAILED on the patch | |
| 19:33:41 | superdan | I have to run out to meet someone in a little bit, but I will pick it up when I get back | |
| 19:33:56 | superdan | this person says they have a nice minimum wage job flipping burgers and I am SUPER INTERESTED | |
| 19:35:02 | figleaf | superdan: much less stress, for sure | |
| 19:35:34 | superdan | aye | |
| 19:48:58 | bauzas | oh man, the internet connection in the my train is so terrible :( | |
| 19:52:45 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: Pass APIVersionRequest to extensions https://review.openstack.org/425876 | |
| 19:52:48 | superdan | well, it upgraded placement without exploding, we'll see if it actually works | |
| 19:53:43 | bauzas | superdan: so you modified grenade by adding a new placement service? heh, okay | |
| 19:54:03 | bauzas | I thought it was within nova, but fine by me | |
| 19:55:00 | bauzas | FWIW, I'd need to rebase the top patch since matt wrote a new PS for the bottom one | |
| 19:55:45 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: Pass APIVersionRequest to extensions https://review.openstack.org/425876 | |
| 19:57:46 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova-specs: Fix tag attribute disappearing https://review.openstack.org/426030 | |
| 20:10:00 | openstackgerrit | Jim Rollenhagen proposed openstack/nova: DNM: hack ironic with resource providers https://review.openstack.org/426296 | |
| 20:10:26 | jroll | figleaf: rebased that on your better patchset ^ | |
| 20:10:55 | figleaf | jroll: working better? | |
| 20:13:44 | jroll | figleaf: I couldn't get it going for some reason, and dealing with other stuff since | |
| 20:13:56 | jroll | saw you uploaded that so figured I'd kick my test patch off at least | |
| 20:27:08 | openstackgerrit | Alex Szarka proposed openstack/nova: Transform instance.add_fixed_ip notification https://review.openstack.org/332876 | |
| 21:28:48 | superdan | sdague: even though I did a bunch of work on that grenade patch are you cool with me +W when we've got a good run from the nova patch? | |
| 21:30:05 | sdague | superdan: the one I've got a +2 on? | |
| 21:30:10 | sdague | if so, yes | |
| 21:30:14 | superdan | sdague: yup | |
| 21:30:53 | sdague | yep | |
| 21:31:28 | superdan | thanks | |
| 21:59:45 | diana_clarke | superdan: What do you mean by "unmapped due to normally transient state"? https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/e57714f9f162f60e77222b1ae8e1e78d2cb10a10/nova/cmd/manage.py#L1348 | |
| 22:00:12 | diana_clarke | superdan: asking as I try to respond to this review feedback: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/421436/ | |
| 22:09:46 | superdan | diana_clarke: like before it's scheduled | |
| 22:11:48 | diana_clarke | superdan: So return code 2 will eventually fix itself, correct? It has an instance mapping, just no cell mapping. | |
| 22:13:10 | superdan | diana_clarke: yeah | |
| 22:13:21 | diana_clarke | So perhaps that should read: "Returns 0 when the instance is successfully mapped to a cell, 1 if the instance is not mapped to a cell, and 2 if the instance is in the process of being mapped to a cell." | |
| 22:13:23 | superdan | it's a really small window | |
| 22:13:31 | superdan | sure | |
| 22:13:47 | diana_clarke | so return code 1 is an error case, right? | |
| 22:13:50 | superdan | I mean if you like less awesome comments | |
| 22:14:08 | diana_clarke | superdan: not changing your comment, trying to write the man page | |
| 22:14:10 | diana_clarke | ;) | |
| 22:14:20 | superdan | they both mean that the instance isn't functional, | |
| 22:14:48 | superdan | and 1 could be a transient case as well I think, let me think about it | |
| 22:14:50 | superdan | I know, I meant "awesome" in the snarky way | |
| 22:15:35 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova: Scheduler calling the Placement API https://review.openstack.org/417961 | |
| 22:15:36 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova: Block starting compute unless placement conf is provided https://review.openstack.org/425806 | |
| 22:16:33 | superdan | diana_clarke: okay, so from here forward, 1 is always an error, but not one we expect to happen, because: | |
| 22:16:33 | diana_clarke | Or asking differently (like johnthetubaguy), what action should be taken for return codes 1 & 2? | |
| 22:17:15 | superdan | in the past, we didn't have instance mappings, so if you have an instance in the database and no mapping, it was created on an older release and you didn't do your homework to patch up all the mappings yet | |
| 22:17:31 | superdan | so the point of that tool is really to verify that you created instance mappings for all of them | |
| 22:17:52 | superdan | however, if you run that while things are going on, you could get retval=2 due to a transient luck-based event | |
| 22:18:12 | superdan | but doing the online migrations should fix both cases up for any non-booting instances | |