| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-03-24 | |||
| 19:30:25 | efried | Will update the etherpad accordingly. | |
| 19:30:39 | esberglu | efried: ack | |
| 19:30:59 | efried | (mriedem I'm gonna keep the bottom one in "ready for your review" section - changes trivial since last subteam +1) | |
| 19:46:12 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: API support for tagged device attachment https://review.openstack.org/376021 | |
| 19:46:33 | nkorabli | mriedem: alright! I see. Still think that if it's shelved by admin - user shouldn't be able to unshelve it, though :) But it's kind of a bikeshed probablu | |
| 19:46:42 | nkorabli | *probably | |
| 19:47:18 | nkorabli | so should I change the ticket status? | |
| 19:47:19 | mriedem | nkorabli: in that case, i'd ask in the dev and operators mailing list since this is a latent issue | |
| 19:47:33 | mriedem | nkorabli: i'm genuinely curious what operators think about this | |
| 19:48:27 | melwitt | if the instance is owned by the user, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to unshelve it, no matter who shelved it | |
| 19:48:40 | mriedem | melwitt: i agree | |
| 19:48:49 | mriedem | nkorabli: do you want to send that email or should i? | |
| 19:48:55 | nkorabli | mriedem: Agree, it make sense | |
| 19:49:50 | nkorabli | mriedem: I can do this, just may need your help if someone won't get the idea.. | |
| 19:51:28 | nkorabli | just don't have any experience with mailing lists.. Is there any requirements of how I have to ask questions there? | |
| 19:53:37 | mriedem | no, just state the problem and proposed solution, and see if anyone has a problem with that | |
| 19:53:55 | mriedem | ask in the openstack-dev and openstack-operators mailing lists, and prefix the subject with [nova] so it filters properly | |
| 19:55:19 | melwitt | a use case I can invent for why an admin would shelve something is if they need to free up some resources to do something temporarily and might leave it up to the instance owners to unshelve their stuff later | |
| 19:58:00 | openstackgerrit | John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: WIP: Add policy-remove-scope-checks spec https://review.openstack.org/433037 | |
| 19:58:05 | melwitt | or maybe if admin notices X instances have been idle for Y days, shelve those instances and users have a grace period to unshelve, else their instances will be deleted by admin. I dunno | |
| 19:58:36 | mriedem | we used to have an auto shutdown thing in our internal dev cloud | |
| 19:58:43 | mriedem | where after 2 weeks your vm was shutdown | |
| 19:59:09 | mriedem | some of that was tied to licenses on the os i think | |
| 19:59:21 | mriedem | if you were using a vm for longer than 2 weeks we had to register it for internal compliance audits and such | |
| 19:59:22 | nkorabli | I guess there is some shelve offload time option? Like it will be automatically destroyed after some period of time, or not? | |
| 19:59:35 | mriedem | nkorabli: yes, by default it offloads immediately | |
| 19:59:44 | mriedem | offload == delete the guest from the hypervisor | |
| 20:00:01 | mriedem | so when you unshelve, we have to build the guest again on another compute | |
| 20:00:57 | nkorabli | Ohh... I see! I wasn't sure what the difference between 'shelved' and 'shelved_offloaded'. | |
| 20:01:00 | nkorabli | Cool | |
| 20:01:21 | melwitt | yeah, but shelved instances still take up quota. so deleting them while they're offloaded would free up quota for others in the tenant | |
| 20:03:05 | melwitt | which reminds me, I need to keep an eye on that for how it works with counting | |
| 20:03:42 | nkorabli | mriedem: Thanks a lot for your attention! :) Will send an e-mail today or tomorrow morning. | |
| 20:04:46 | mriedem | nkorabli: np, thanks for persisting on this one | |
| 20:13:10 | jroll | mriedem: sorry, I was being half serious about the forensics thing - i.e. that behavior being a feature for an admin taking a snapshot for purposes of criminal investigation or whatever | |
| 20:18:57 | mriedem | jroll: ack | |
| 20:19:15 | mriedem | sdague: on a server update, i see we call the server view builder show() method and return that in the response body, | |
| 20:19:31 | mriedem | what i'm unclear of, is does that trigger the server show extensions to add their special bits to the response? | |
| 20:22:25 | mriedem | for example, when i look at https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/extended_volumes.py | |
| 20:22:33 | mriedem | that extends the show and detail methods for the servers resource | |
| 20:22:49 | mriedem | but that will only be called on a GET for servers, right? | |
| 20:23:01 | mriedem | it would have nothing to do with the response for a POST or PUT | |
| 20:23:08 | mriedem | the server view builder just does it's own thing | |
| 20:25:05 | mriedem | reason i ask is we currently list os-extended-volumes:volumes_attached in the response for server create and update, and i think those are wrong | |
| 20:29:33 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: fix os-extended-volumes:volumes_attached in servers responses https://review.openstack.org/449809 | |
| 20:37:52 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: spawn/delete #1: no-ops https://review.openstack.org/438119 | |
| 20:39:56 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: spawn/destroy #2: functional https://review.openstack.org/438598 | |
| 20:40:14 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: power_on/off and reboot https://review.openstack.org/427380 | |
| 20:40:40 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: spawn/destroy #3: TaskFlow https://review.openstack.org/438729 | |
| 20:40:57 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: spawn/destroy #4: full flavor https://review.openstack.org/391288 | |
| 20:41:16 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: console https://review.openstack.org/409402 | |
| 20:42:00 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: SSP emphemeral disk support https://review.openstack.org/443189 | |
| 20:42:08 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: PowerVM Driver: config drive https://review.openstack.org/409404 | |
| 20:43:20 | efried | adreznec esberglu mriedem ^^ Trivial rebases all the way up, because of a change to exception.py (In case you were in the middle of reviewing previous patch set.) | |
| 20:43:48 | mriedem | i was not | |
| 20:44:01 | efried | But, you know, just in case. | |
| 20:44:04 | mriedem | you seem unable to sit still on that bottom change | |
| 20:44:18 | mriedem | are you addressing feedback from within the powervm team or other? | |
| 20:44:32 | efried | No. It's only rebases. The tip of the master branch is a moving target. | |
| 20:45:43 | efried | Only real change since 3/16 (PS6) has been requirements update for new pypowervm release. | |
| 20:47:21 | efried | ...and flake8-import-order, which seems to have come in waves of increasing strictness. | |
| 20:49:24 | efried | Bottom two are the only ones that touch common files so far; so after those are in, we can expect a lot less no-op churn. | |
| 20:57:49 | mriedem | has this kind of spec come up before besides the spec around kilo/liberty to allow adding more servers to an existing group? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/389216/2 | |
| 20:58:13 | mriedem | ^ is basically, add config that reserves 'slots' in a server group for additional later servers in the same group for affinity to the same host | |
| 21:10:59 | mriedem | jroll: is this still an issue? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/321014/ | |
| 21:11:03 | mriedem | because that patch is really old | |
| 21:13:07 | openstackgerrit | Maxim Nestratov proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Virtuozzo containers config drive support https://review.openstack.org/449818 | |
| 21:22:06 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Empty machine_id file causes get_sysinfo_serial_auto to fail. https://review.openstack.org/343943 | |
| 21:25:03 | mriedem | tjones: someone from the vmware subteam might want to pick this up if it's still valid https://review.openstack.org/#/c/402256/ | |
| 21:30:23 | tjones | sure. looking | |
| 21:31:11 | tjones | yes we will. i'll ping yang to pick it back up | |
| 21:52:14 | tjones | this one too https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270116/ | |
| 21:56:25 | efried | mdbooth Anyone reporting [[os.fsync(data.fileno()) OSError: [Errno 22] Invalid argument]] since https://review.openstack.org/#/c/443583/ ? | |
| 22:03:56 | efried | (Thing is, I don't know how that call can get EINVAL. Different errors occur if, e.g., the fileno is bogus, or the file is closed, or anything else I can come up with.) | |
| 22:16:38 | eandersson_ | Anyone experienced an issue with large images causing nova to try to fail to set up the network, and ends up creating two neutron ports (since it fails with a neutron timeout)? | |
| 22:17:12 | eandersson_ | > nova.compute.manager ConnectTimeout: Request to http://netutron:9696/v2.0/ports.json timed out | |
| 23:56:37 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Regression test for local delete with an attached volume https://review.openstack.org/449334 | |
| 23:56:38 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Set size/status during image create with FakeImageService https://review.openstack.org/449702 | |
| 23:58:53 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Set size/status during image create with FakeImageService https://review.openstack.org/449702 | |
| 23:58:53 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Regression test for local delete with an attached volume https://review.openstack.org/449334 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2017-03-25 | |||
| 00:33:32 | mriedem | superdan: your favorite question on a friday night at 5:30 - we don't ever delete InstanceMapping records do we? because if we did, you couldn't get details on a soft deleted instance from the cell - in the instances.deleted != 0 sense | |
| 00:33:45 | mriedem | even though i see there is an InstanceMapping.destroy() method, i don't see that ever used | |
| 00:36:44 | melwitt | I didn't think we delete InstanceMappings | |
| 00:36:54 | mriedem | i'm not seeing that we do anywhere | |
| 00:37:06 | mriedem | almost wonder if we should drop the InstanceMapping.destroy() method from the object... | |
| 00:37:33 | mriedem | or at least add a comment to not ever use it for real because it breaks the API | |
| 00:38:57 | melwitt | maybe yeah. those interfaces were written well before they were ever used, by months at least | |
| 00:49:24 | mriedem | that all came up in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/441692/ | |
| 00:49:41 | mriedem | and the pain that is what do we do about listing deleted instances if we're using searchlight which doesn't keep track of indexes for deleted instances | |
| 00:50:09 | mriedem | i think i'm going to submit yet another forum topic for using searchlight in nova-api since it's a fairy hairy change | |
| 00:50:14 | mriedem | *fairly | |
| 00:50:15 | mriedem | ha | |
| 01:04:37 | openstackgerrit | 龚肖 proposed openstack/nova master: Replaces uuid.uuid4 with uuidutils.generate_uuid() https://review.openstack.org/449537 | |
| 01:55:26 | superdan | melwitt: we delete instance mappings | |
| 01:55:52 | superdan | we just went over this with bauwser I think | |
| 01:56:02 | superdan | we don't in the soft delete case or something | |
| 01:56:39 | superdan | wait, I think I'm thinking of reqspec | |
| 01:56:49 | superdan | I guess we have to have IMs until purge | |
| 01:57:13 | superdan | which is what we discussed with bauwser yeah, purging those at instance purge time since that's when we know we can delete them | |
| 01:57:17 | melwitt | superdan: oh, I didn't know. I did find one destroy() so far in conductor/manager that happens in the case of a HostMappingNotFound | |