| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-03-07 | |||
| 19:15:58 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: standard memory page resource classes https://review.openstack.org/442718 | |
| 19:17:19 | mriedem | cdent: i think this is where we get the compute. prefix on the unversioned notification https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/utils.py#L324 | |
| 19:17:26 | mriedem | versioned is https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/utils.py#L356 | |
| 19:17:29 | mriedem | which doesn't have the prefix | |
| 19:18:26 | cdent | that seems rather unfortunate | |
| 19:18:32 | cdent | he said blandly | |
| 19:21:58 | mriedem | i assume that was intentional | |
| 19:22:54 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update docstrings for legacy notification methods https://review.openstack.org/442723 | |
| 19:23:18 | cdent | I know that there was intention to make it so you could have both of them going at the same time, but from the consumer side, having different names (instead of different topics (is that right, I'm not sure of the nomenclature)) makes switching harder | |
| 19:23:35 | mriedem | by default nova is configured to send both | |
| 19:24:09 | mriedem | http://logs.openstack.org/59/382959/17/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/f2fe0de/logs/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz#_2017-03-06_14_39_55_787 | |
| 19:24:16 | mriedem | notifications.notification_format = both | |
| 19:24:35 | mriedem | http://logs.openstack.org/59/382959/17/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/f2fe0de/logs/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz#_2017-03-06_14_39_55_756 | |
| 19:24:43 | mriedem | oslo_messaging_notifications.topics = ['notifications'] | |
| 19:24:43 | mriedem | i only see the one topic | |
| 19:27:12 | mriedem | https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/implemented/versioned-notification-transformation-newton.html#notifications-impact | |
| 19:27:18 | mriedem | "As implemented in the versioned-notification-api bp the versioned notifications are always emitted to a different amqp topic called ‘versioned_notifications’ so the consumer can differentiate between the legacy and the new format by the topic." | |
| 19:27:28 | mriedem | i'm not sure that's true | |
| 19:28:19 | mriedem | what i think i'd like to see, is some docs in https://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/notifications.html about how to actually configure / set things up to use this | |
| 19:28:30 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add workaround to disable group policy check upcall https://review.openstack.org/442736 | |
| 19:28:36 | mriedem | because i'm putting this together, shittily, from code and old specs | |
| 19:30:54 | cdent | everyone else has continuouspartialattentionitis too | |
| 19:31:27 | mriedem | oh i see it https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/rpc.py#L92 | |
| 19:31:40 | mriedem | the default topic is 'notifications' | |
| 19:31:46 | mriedem | which is why the legacy notifier doesn't define a topics kwarg | |
| 19:31:53 | mriedem | so we're sending to separate topics | |
| 19:31:58 | mriedem | with different event types | |
| 19:32:11 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Teach HostAPI about cells https://review.openstack.org/442162 | |
| 19:32:11 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Get instance availability_zone without hitting the api db https://review.openstack.org/439754 | |
| 19:32:12 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Target cell in super conductor operations https://review.openstack.org/438022 | |
| 19:32:12 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make os-availability-zones know about cells https://review.openstack.org/442163 | |
| 19:32:13 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Teach os-migrations about cells https://review.openstack.org/442685 | |
| 19:32:13 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Change MQ targeting to honor only what is in the context https://review.openstack.org/438023 | |
| 19:32:14 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make consoleauth target the proper cell https://review.openstack.org/441461 | |
| 19:32:14 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make scheduler target cells to get compute node instance info https://review.openstack.org/439891 | |
| 19:32:14 | dansmith | jaypipes: guh, sorry, pep8 fail on the _second_ friggin patch | |
| 19:32:15 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Make conductor ask scheduler to limit migrates to same cell https://review.openstack.org/438025 | |
| 19:32:15 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add cell field to Destination object https://review.openstack.org/438024 | |
| 19:32:16 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Teach os-aggregates about cells https://review.openstack.org/442200 | |
| 19:32:16 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Teach simple_tenant_usage about cells https://review.openstack.org/441388 | |
| 19:32:17 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add workaround to disable group policy check upcall https://review.openstack.org/442736 | |
| 19:35:43 | jaypipes | dansmith: damn you, Smith! | |
| 19:40:13 | dansmith | I know, I suck | |
| 19:54:46 | mriedem | http://logs.openstack.org/94/436094/12/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/051cffa/logs/screen-n-api.txt.gz#_2017-03-07_00_14_09_285 | |
| 19:54:46 | mriedem | dansmith: found your issue | |
| 19:55:17 | mriedem | something jacked with the compute service version | |
| 19:55:54 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/servers.py#L448 | |
| 20:08:10 | openstackgerrit | Sarafraj Singh proposed openstack/nova-specs master: WIP: Add live-migration-force-after-timeout spec https://review.openstack.org/438467 | |
| 20:09:13 | openstackgerrit | Sarafraj Singh proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add live-migration-force-after-timeout spec https://review.openstack.org/438467 | |
| 20:09:51 | dansmith | mriedem: oh I bet it's just that we need to check all cells | |
| 20:09:55 | dansmith | mriedem: for the service version | |
| 20:09:58 | dansmith | mriedem: thanks for that | |
| 20:10:21 | mriedem | \o/ | |
| 20:12:02 | dansmith | yeah, that's an easy fix | |
| 20:12:17 | dansmith | alternately we can probably remove that as it's for mitaka computes right? | |
| 20:12:45 | efried | Did flake8 get an upgrade recently? Suddenly my imports are wrong. | |
| 20:14:37 | mriedem | dansmith: maybe? | |
| 20:15:12 | mriedem | dansmith: we have this talk every few weeks about supporting n-2 vs handling service version checking | |
| 20:15:27 | mriedem | we don't support n-2 officially, we don't test that way, | |
| 20:15:39 | mriedem | but we don't have anything that says what the minimum required compute is either | |
| 20:15:43 | dansmith | mriedem: we've never supported anything beyond n-1, | |
| 20:15:51 | dansmith | mriedem: we do because n-2 computes will refuse to start | |
| 20:15:53 | mriedem | we could use nova-status upgrade check mofo ftw | |
| 20:16:14 | dansmith | mriedem: you literally can't start n-2 computes, I think that's pretty clear messaging :) | |
| 20:16:26 | mriedem | why? | |
| 20:16:34 | dansmith | why is that clear or why can you not? | |
| 20:16:38 | mriedem | why can you not? | |
| 20:16:51 | dansmith | the service checkin will refuse to roll the minimum version back | |
| 20:17:10 | mriedem | but what if i never restarted the compute and i've just got a mitaka compute still running | |
| 20:18:00 | dansmith | mriedem: you likely wouldn't have been able to complete online migrations, and thus never have been able to apply ocata schema migrations, etc | |
| 20:18:15 | dansmith | mriedem: we've had those kinds of deps before, not sure if we really have had them between mitaka and ocata, but.. | |
| 20:18:29 | mriedem | to be clear, you're talking about this? https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/service.py#L304 | |
| 20:18:32 | dansmith | it's always been a blanket policy, I'm not sure why we're suddenly concerned about it | |
| 20:18:40 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 20:18:54 | mriedem | "This could happen if we were started with older code by accident, either due to a rollback or an old and un-updated node suddenly coming back onto the network." | |
| 20:19:03 | mriedem | so i get that, like with an evacuated node | |
| 20:20:01 | mriedem | i'm not super concerned about this, i'd just like something a bit more blocking during upgrade that says, oh you have computes < x and x is the minimum to get to pike, so stop upgrade now | |
| 20:20:22 | dansmith | well, nova-status is the right place for that I guess | |
| 20:20:35 | dansmith | and if you ignore it, then shame on you | |
| 20:21:42 | mriedem | hmm, service version 12 wasn't mitaka either | |
| 20:21:50 | mriedem | mitaka max service version was 9 | |
| 20:22:05 | dansmith | mriedem: right 12 was newton, | |
| 20:22:08 | mriedem | newton max was 15 | |
| 20:22:09 | dansmith | it checks for <12 right? | |
| 20:22:16 | migi | dansmith: hey, question if I want to check "nova-manage db archive_deleted_rows" do I need to have full dump of nova db (maybe even different one??) or just some tables? | |
| 20:22:32 | mriedem | dansmith: the get me a network checks for < 12 yeah | |
| 20:22:49 | migi | dansmith: I was reading the https://docs.openstack.org/ops-guide/ops-backup-recovery.html and am unsure if the nova db is sufficient | |
| 20:22:51 | dansmith | mriedem: right, so it's checking for mitaka, or n1 or whatever | |
| 20:22:58 | mriedem | dansmith: we could add a min compute service version check to nova-status that requires compute minimum of 16 | |
| 20:23:01 | dansmith | migi: you have to have all the tables, but don't have to have data | |
| 20:23:08 | dansmith | migi: but it won't be much of a test without data | |
| 20:23:22 | dansmith | mriedem: right, that's the only place I think it makes sense | |
| 20:23:46 | mriedem | so we land that, then remove the straddle code in the api, maybe doesn't have to be in order | |
| 20:23:48 | melwitt | jaypipes: I'm currently hacking up the count resources for quota patch if you want to hold off on that one (also, thanks for reviewing the quotas object one) | |
| 20:23:50 | mriedem | just before we release | |
| 20:23:52 | migi | dansmith: thanks | |
| 20:24:22 | dansmith | mriedem: it's advisory anyway, but I can do it as part of removing this check yeah | |
| 20:24:29 | mriedem | dansmith: that would be lovely | |
| 20:25:07 | mriedem | i'm going to start reviewing https://review.openstack.org/#/c/440856/ and up, do i need any pep talk before i start? | |
| 20:25:32 | dansmith | mriedem: you can do it, you big code reviewing stud muffin you | |