Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-03-14
17:07:44 siva_krishnan johnthetubaguy: sure. will update the commit message
17:08:01 mdbooth I've read the description and use cases sections a couple of times and hadn't managed to infer it from context.
17:08:08 mdbooth That could just be me, though.
17:09:30 openstackgerrit John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add locked-by-service spec https://review.openstack.org/438134
17:10:21 johnthetubaguy mdbooth: not sure, the folks reading that so far have a lot of shared context around the problem
17:12:29 openstackgerrit Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Add json style checking for sample notifications https://review.openstack.org/443677
17:18:57 johnthetubaguy siva_krishnan: thanks
17:19:20 mdbooth johnthetubaguy: Incidentally, you mentioned (last week, I think) you'd have another look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/383859/
17:20:02 johnthetubaguy mdbooth: damm, yes, still not got out of the specs really
17:20:54 mdbooth I'd really like to get that landed, or at least know what needs doing to it.
17:21:08 mdbooth It's a bit in limbo right now.
17:21:53 openstackgerrit Sivasathurappan Radhakrishnan proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Live Migration of Rescued Instances https://review.openstack.org/347161
17:22:11 jaypipes mriedem, dansmith: your reviews on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/441544/ would be great. thanks in advance!
17:22:15 johnthetubaguy siva_krishnan: acutally that spec is really different from the previously approved one: http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/approved/live-migrate-rescued-instances.html
17:22:31 mriedem jaypipes: ack
17:22:46 johnthetubaguy mdbooth: understood, I hope to get there really soon
17:22:47 sdague mriedem: you are going to have to explain the flavor param on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/445236/1to me
17:22:55 jaypipes dansmith: what's your most pressing patch for me to review?
17:23:11 sdague because I'm not seeing any logic that makes that a different value in the new code than the old code
17:23:34 dansmith sdague: it's because of lazy loading
17:23:40 dansmith sdague: needing to go to the right cell when that happens
17:24:00 dansmith jaypipes: I'm currently moving code around so.. nothing right now :(
17:24:16 mriedem sdague: must did
17:24:18 mriedem *just did
17:24:20 mdbooth johnthetubaguy: Thanks!
17:24:25 dansmith jaypipes: you can look at this if you want: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/427903
17:24:28 mriedem sdague: it's all about cell context
17:24:35 jaypipes dansmith: cool, will do.
17:24:40 dansmith but it's not super pressing
17:25:13 dansmith jaypipes: not sure I have enough context in those commit messages for you to know why that's important actually.. unless you were paying attention at the PTG :)
17:25:31 siva_krishnan johnthetubaguy: we have almost changed all the textual content of previously approved spec but functionality wise this was the only change we agreed on.
17:25:32 mriedem dansmith: nor the bp description :)
17:26:00 dansmith I know
17:26:03 jaypipes dansmith: I'll ask if I don't understand :)
17:26:16 mriedem i'll add notes to the bp
17:29:51 mriedem dansmith: there https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/discover-hosts-faster
17:30:25 dansmith mriedem: <3
17:30:27 dansmith jaypipes: ^
17:30:32 sdague mriedem / dansmith ok, so you end up having to change context to look up the flavor, because it's only in the the cell db ?
17:30:44 mriedem sdague: the instance is in the cell0 db
17:30:45 sdague but then you are making all the quota changes at the api db?
17:30:49 mriedem the context, by default, looks in the nova db
17:30:58 jaypipes bueno.
17:31:01 mriedem no, the quota changes are in the nova db
17:31:13 mriedem quotas aren't in the api db yet, which is why we have this bug
17:31:19 dansmith well,
17:31:20 dansmith not really
17:31:26 dansmith but if he buys that, then run with it
17:31:29 dansmith oops, was that public?
17:31:34 mriedem ha
17:31:42 mriedem you typed too fast
17:32:05 dansmith sdague: api hedged and put the quota reservation in the non-cell0 cell the instance was destined for,
17:32:14 dansmith but then we put it in cell0 when we couldn't schedule it
17:32:20 sdague so, I guess I'm not sure I understand why the internals interface doesn't make instance.flavor just go lazy load from the right place
17:32:25 dansmith sdague: once our quotas are "fixed for cells" then this won't be a problem
17:32:53 sdague or is that just because this was a late breaking bug, and this was the smallest backportable thing?
17:33:09 dansmith sdague: because the instance is now in cell0,
17:33:17 dansmith sdague: but the reservations were created in cellN in a previous request
17:34:36 mriedem "why the internals interface doesn't make instance.flavor just go lazy load from the right place" the instance object would have to lookup it's own instance mapping to find the cell it's in, and then do a lookup using that context i believe,
17:34:48 dansmith no, it's worse
17:34:49 mriedem which could probably work, but wasn't something i thought of doing, at least in the mainline path
17:34:58 dansmith because the reservations are in the cell it's not in, right?
17:35:05 mriedem correct,
17:35:18 sdague I don't know, I just see you did a lookup call to figure out what cell the instance is in right above it
17:35:25 mriedem but i think sdague is asking why i have to be explicit about looking up the instance.flavor in the proper cell, rather than instance.flavor lazy-load doing that for us implicitly
17:35:32 sdague so from a naive pov, it seems like that could be stashed in instance itself
17:36:15 mriedem we could handle InstanceNotFound in the obj_load_attr in the Instance object and if the context isn't targeted for a cell (no db_connection attr) we could do an instance mapping lookup on ourselves
17:36:16 dansmith sdague: because that's not how it works right now
17:36:21 dansmith :)
17:36:26 mriedem but that's not going to happen in the backport
17:37:08 mriedem dansmith: do you think doing a notfound / lookup / re-query in the instance.obj_load_attr is worth looking into so we can avoid explicit context switching like this?
17:37:18 dansmith no
17:37:39 dansmith the instance object should never know about instancemapping
17:37:41 mriedem too magical and hard to debug if it's wrong?
17:37:42 mriedem ok
17:37:56 dansmith they're in different databases, and that thing will fail if we hit that notfound if we're on a compute for example
17:38:42 mriedem yeah
17:39:10 sdague ok, well this feels kind of fragile, but if that's what we got, so be it
17:40:02 mriedem i don't disagree that this is gorpy, the instance delete path has always been bad and this isn't helping
17:40:19 dansmith the instance delete path is like some of the worst code we have
17:40:26 dansmith right behind BDMs probably :)
17:40:34 mriedem what about quotas?
17:40:36 mriedem this is quotas + delete
17:40:38 mriedem worst ever
17:40:48 openstackgerrit Juan Antonio Osorio Robles proposed openstack/nova master: Make versioned notifications topics configurable https://review.openstack.org/444947
17:40:48 melwitt local delete
17:40:54 mriedem i do think we have some stuff we can cleanup in the delete flow that was meant for the transition to cells v2
17:41:13 mriedem i started trying that cleanup here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/443405/
17:41:25 mriedem but apparently part of it is still needed
17:41:28 melwitt that reminds me, I still have a patch up for one of the local delete problems https://review.openstack.org/340614
17:41:42 mriedem melwitt: the 10th revert of the 10th revert?
17:42:05 melwitt yeah
17:43:06 mriedem dansmith: if you can hit the 2 remaining ocata patches https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/ocata then i can prep the release
17:43:16 mriedem i have a date with a 4th notary
17:44:33 mriedem jaypipes: that ironic inventory patch is on my list for the afternoon once i get rejected by this other notary
17:45:11 johnthetubaguy bauzas: I think there are quite a few unresolved comments from previous patch sets on this one: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/440580
17:45:23 johnthetubaguy bauzas: am I missing context on another discussion that resolved them?
17:53:12 jaypipes mriedem: cool, thx
17:56:04 melwitt dansmith: on the host_manager thing, I don't think you need to change anything. I'm just missing how the double iterating would have to happen if it were changed
17:56:18 dansmith I just explained

Earlier   Later