| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-02-14 | |||
| 11:38:06 | snikitin | johnthetubaguy: ok! will do. thanks for review! | |
| 11:38:45 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add 'move-nova-cmds-to-click' spec https://review.openstack.org/433603 | |
| 11:39:57 | johnthetubaguy | snikitin: looks like we went for badrequest in the past: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/servers.py#L587 | |
| 11:40:54 | snikitin | johnthetubaguy: Ok. will do the same | |
| 11:41:00 | johnthetubaguy | snikitin: thanks | |
| 11:57:44 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: hacking: Reword in the imperative https://review.openstack.org/363624 | |
| 11:58:58 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add polcy-docs spec https://review.openstack.org/433010 | |
| 12:14:22 | sdague | TFW you make a change that should break cinder, and all the tests pass ... o_O | |
| 12:23:40 | cdent | :( | |
| 12:35:17 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add policy-project-checks spec https://review.openstack.org/433037 | |
| 12:40:35 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Run api sample tests against 2.latest https://review.openstack.org/430352 | |
| 12:40:36 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: api sample tests: handle response missing an item https://review.openstack.org/431738 | |
| 12:40:36 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Add skip_latest_microversion decorator https://review.openstack.org/433585 | |
| 12:40:37 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Fixtures for 2.latest api sample tests https://review.openstack.org/431723 | |
| 12:43:11 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add policy-project-checks spec https://review.openstack.org/433037 | |
| 12:43:11 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add polcy-docs spec https://review.openstack.org/433010 | |
| 12:43:54 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add policy-remove-scope-checks spec https://review.openstack.org/433037 | |
| 12:49:36 | openstackgerrit | Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/nova master: Optimize time during PCI alias parsing process https://review.openstack.org/427145 | |
| 13:01:47 | sdague | cdent: yeh, well I sent an email to the list, will try to figure it out there | |
| 13:32:47 | alex_xu | bauzas: cdent why we need another message for api response than the exception one https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428612/3/nova/api/openstack/placement/handlers/resource_class.py@90? | |
| 13:33:37 | alex_xu | ensure whether it is on purpose | |
| 13:33:39 | cdent | alex_xu: just to be nice and explicit? | |
| 13:34:30 | cdent | basically the idea is that we want the http api error messages to be fairly detailed and informative but the generic/original exception doesn't need to be | |
| 13:34:42 | alex_xu | cdent: yeah, we need another one if the exception just talk about common thing or implement thing | |
| 13:35:38 | alex_xu | cdent: emm...probably for this case https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428612/3/nova/exception.py, they are very close i guess | |
| 13:36:22 | cdent | since we're going to reraise anyway (to make sure we are using the webob exception) having another message is fine, I would think? | |
| 13:42:08 | bauzas | cdent: well, I'm not really sure the detailed message really helps here | |
| 13:42:20 | bauzas | cdent: it says "sorry, please retry" | |
| 13:42:29 | bauzas | well, okay, but why ? | |
| 13:42:44 | cdent | bauzas: did you see my earlier -1 comment? | |
| 13:43:13 | cdent | i haven't reviewed it since then | |
| 13:43:54 | bauzas | cdent: sure, I agree with your comment, I'm just trying to explain that only if we're providing a "why", it's just a nit to return a separate exception | |
| 13:44:08 | bauzas | oops | |
| 13:44:25 | bauzas | only if we're providing a "why", it's *not* a nit | |
| 13:47:06 | alex_xu | at least the format in the api layer better than the exception one | |
| 13:57:51 | tdurakov | paul-carlton2 eliqiao shaohe_feng pkoniszewski yuntongjin mdbooth kashyap kmartin claudiub tobasco tdurakov abhishekk mrhillsman raj_singh wznoinsk siva_krishnan, hi everyone, live-migration subteam meating in 3 minutes at #openstack-meeting-3 | |
| 14:08:52 | mriedem | tonyb: novalcient 7.1.0 seems fine, it's already in u-c | |
| 14:09:07 | mriedem | 7.1.0 fixed some issues in 7.0 | |
| 14:18:24 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: spawn/destroy https://review.openstack.org/391288 | |
| 14:44:11 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add additional-default-policy-roles spec https://review.openstack.org/427872 | |
| 14:44:14 | bauzas | mriedem: quick q, what about StringFreeze here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428985/1 | |
| 14:44:29 | mriedem | bauzas: master is pike | |
| 14:44:52 | mriedem | :) | |
| 14:45:06 | bauzas | that's what happens when you worked last week for something else | |
| 14:45:23 | bauzas | BOOOM | |
| 14:49:12 | sdague | mriedem: so, cinder didn't break with that change | |
| 14:49:23 | mriedem | sdague: just read your email | |
| 14:49:24 | mriedem | and replied | |
| 14:49:30 | mriedem | sdague: i know how to tickle it | |
| 14:49:44 | sdague | mriedem: ok, what am I missing? | |
| 14:49:55 | mriedem | did you see DuncanT's reply? | |
| 14:50:00 | sdague | I guess not yet | |
| 14:50:08 | mriedem | devstack doesn't run with the nfs job | |
| 14:50:21 | mriedem | nova has that in the experimental queue though, so i can rig that test up quick | |
| 14:51:20 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: test nova/cinder admin interaction https://review.openstack.org/433685 | |
| 14:51:30 | mriedem | the remotefs based volume drivers have the guest-assisted snapshot callback into nova | |
| 14:51:33 | mriedem | which uses the admin api | |
| 14:51:52 | mriedem | ^ should hit it in the nfs job on the experimental queue | |
| 14:52:17 | mriedem | i also thought the cinder team got volume retype/migration testing in tempest now, which would perform a call from cinder to nova to do the volume swap | |
| 14:52:26 | mriedem | scottda: ^ didn't volume retype get into tempest? | |
| 14:53:00 | smcginnis | mriedem: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/195443/ | |
| 14:53:30 | smcginnis | mriedem: And scottda got this as well: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326681/ | |
| 14:53:44 | scottda | yes, but that test won't trigger the swap volume unless the backend name is different... | |
| 14:53:47 | mriedem | smcginnis: that only runs in gate-tempest-dsvm-lvm-multibackend-ubuntu-xenial-nv right? | |
| 14:53:59 | mriedem | gate-tempest-dsvm-lvm-multibackend-ubuntu-xenial-nv is also in the nova experimental queue | |
| 14:54:18 | mriedem | did the nfs volume snapshots patch ever merge? | |
| 14:54:19 | smcginnis | mriedem: I believe so, right scottda? ^ | |
| 14:54:22 | scottda | mriedem: smcginnis I'm AFK and probably offline most of today. Erlon should be able to help with details on the migration tests. | |
| 14:54:38 | smcginnis | mriedem: Yes, NFS snapshots did merge. | |
| 14:54:44 | scottda | smcginnis: mriedem Yes, that's a multibackend test | |
| 14:54:45 | mriedem | yup https://review.openstack.org/#/c/147186/ | |
| 14:54:46 | mriedem | ok | |
| 14:55:17 | scottda | Sorry, I still need to audit all the swap tests, to verify we're getting what we want by calling nova swap_volume. | |
| 14:55:31 | scottda | I've brought it up with Erlon, but I need to check the nova logs. | |
| 14:56:25 | mriedem | in case you guys haven't seen this yet https://review.openstack.org/#/c/433272/ | |
| 14:56:29 | mriedem | is why we're talking about it | |
| 14:57:06 | smcginnis | Heard mention but hadn't seen yet. Makes sense to me to simplify that. | |
| 14:57:54 | sdague | mriedem well, I've also got a cinder patch up to default to working in the publicURL case - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/433289/ | |
| 14:58:34 | smcginnis | sdague: Might be good to put a "Depends-on" on there if you update it. | |
| 14:59:40 | jaypipes | anybody else seeing a "No module named gdbm" failure trying to run unit or functional tests today? | |
| 15:00:17 | smcginnis | jaypipes: I've seen that in the past. Can't remember how I resolved it other than maybe just "rm -fr .tox" | |
| 15:00:19 | sdague | jaypipes: you have to run python3 tests first | |
| 15:00:26 | smcginnis | Oh, right! | |
| 15:00:34 | sdague | smcginnis: it's testrepository | |
| 15:00:57 | sdague | jaypipes: rm .testrepository/times.dbm | |
| 15:01:00 | smcginnis | sdague: So jaypipes will need to delete .testrepository first, right? Then run py35 first. | |
| 15:01:04 | jaypipes | sdague: you mean I need to rm -rf .tox; tox -epy35; tox -efunctional? | |
| 15:01:18 | jaypipes | sdague: ah, .testrepository. | |
| 15:01:20 | smcginnis | sdague: Oh, good point. Just times.dbm | |
| 15:01:26 | sdague | jaypipes: no, I mean you have to delete your testrepository dbm file, and always run python35 tests before others | |
| 15:01:42 | sdague | testrepository uses default dbm format from python | |
| 15:01:45 | jaypipes | sdague: good to know. ty vm sir! | |
| 15:01:53 | sdague | there are about 5? formats | |
| 15:02:13 | sdague | the default format in python2 was actually deleted entirely from the stdlib in python3 | |
| 15:02:28 | sdague | because, clearly, that could never go wrong :) | |
| 15:02:32 | jaypipes | heh | |
| 15:02:48 | sdague | and there was resistance to work around it in testrepository | |
| 15:02:58 | sdague | maybe mtreinish can fix that in his fork | |
| 15:05:28 | mtreinish | sdague: I already have an experimental feature in it that uses subunit2sql instead of dbm | |
| 15:05:50 | sdague | mtreinish: ok, but you could also just resolve the dbm issue right? | |