Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-04-05
15:12:49 jaypipes melwitt: it's not that it cannot be done, just that it could be done more simply by the placement API. but I'm cool doing that in a followup patch.
15:13:10 melwitt yeah, just thinking about it more
15:14:09 mriedem how would it be hundreds when the default max limit on instances is 20?
15:14:19 melwitt hundreds of compute nodes
15:14:21 melwitt is common
15:14:34 mriedem yeah but aren't you asking for allocations for a given project?
15:14:36 melwitt and allocations are per resource provider
15:14:50 cdent mriedem: you make an excellent point
15:15:02 mriedem but my project by default can only allocate up to 20 instances right?
15:15:13 mriedem b/c allocations.consumer_id == instance.uuid
15:15:17 melwitt oh, hm
15:15:52 jaypipes there will still be 3x that number of records in the normal case (a record per instance for VCPU, MEMORY_MB, and DISK_GB of course)
15:16:28 jaypipes but anyway, like I said, it's nothing more than an ease-of-use thing (doing the top-level /usages endpoint) for me.
15:16:59 mriedem my point is i don't like 2 ways to skin the cat
15:17:15 jaypipes mriedem: one is a summary view, the other is a details view, that's all this is.
15:17:16 mriedem if /usages is the thing that's better and keeps the math on the server side, then that seems fine
15:17:31 mriedem i don't want to provide 2 apis when one is needed
15:17:38 jaypipes mriedem: we already have the /allocations endpoint, though. which is what cdent is saying.
15:17:39 mriedem so let's pick the one correct api
15:17:43 melwitt yeah, I was kinda thinking why not just do /usages only then
15:17:59 mriedem has anyone looked at the turd sandwich that is the compute api lately? :)
15:18:02 mriedem let's not do that again
15:18:27 jaypipes mriedem: Matt, nobody here is recommending making placement API into a turd sandwich.
15:18:34 mriedem jaypipes: so rather than change /allocations to take query params, we add /usages if that's better
15:18:45 cdent we do not have just /allocations yet, we have /allocations/{consumer_uuid}, burt limiting the numbers of paths seems nice
15:18:48 jaypipes mriedem: both the detail view (/allocations) and the summary view (/usages) are useful.
15:18:57 jaypipes cdent: good point.
15:19:04 mriedem jaypipes: they are not useful if we aren't using them both
15:19:09 mriedem one will be technical debt
15:19:34 mriedem so what is the one true best api that we can provide for melwitt's quota counting client side code?
15:19:36 mriedem and let's do that
15:19:55 jaypipes mriedem: my guess is that as soon as we add a summary view, someone will say "but what allocations are underneath that summary view?"
15:19:59 jaypipes mriedem: but meh.
15:20:10 cdent jaypipes: exactly my point
15:20:12 mriedem if someone has a valid use case later, then we add a new thing
15:20:23 melwitt I am still not clear on what the difference between a usage object and a allocation object is either
15:20:24 cdent people will want the details, and we have code that creates most of those details already
15:20:35 jaypipes mriedem: for the quota-counting use case, I believe GET /usages?project_id=X&user_id=Y is the best fit.
15:20:48 mriedem melwitt: idk either
15:20:54 mriedem because it wasn't modeled in the spec as it came up later
15:21:04 mriedem jaypipes: did you think /usages already existed when you commented on that in the spec?
15:21:28 jaypipes melwitt: a usage object is an aggregate view (total number of VCPU used, instead of X number of allocation records each with a VCPU record)
15:21:37 mriedem oh i see /resource_providers/{uuid}/usages
15:21:51 melwitt I'm not seeing any example of one in a response in the gabbits
15:22:30 mriedem melwitt: it's in the allocations gabbits
15:22:31 mriedem for /resource_providers/{uuid}/usages
15:22:40 melwitt ah, thanks
15:23:23 mriedem and usage.yaml
15:24:41 melwitt in usage.yaml all the responses are empty, I think. I was just looking to get an idea what the existing usages response looks like
15:25:04 melwitt but it's been explained, aggregate view, and that would be ideal for the quota checks
15:26:48 mriedem {'resource_provider_generation': 1, 'usages': {'VCPU': 2, 'MEMORY_MB': 2048, 'DISK_GB': 80}}
15:26:52 mriedem something like that i think
15:27:40 melwitt gotcha, thanks
15:27:43 cdent mriedem, melwitt line 353 in this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/370204/2/nova/tests/functional/api/openstack/placement/gabbits/fullrep.yaml
15:27:59 cdent and 441
15:28:58 melwitt perfect, thanks
15:37:03 dansmith successful devstack multi-cell run: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/436094
15:58:20 openstackgerrit Huan Xie proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: use os-xenapi V2 https://review.openstack.org/453493
16:03:03 sfinucan mriedem: Quick question on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/433603/
16:04:03 sfinucan I've the Sphinx integration for cliff done, but it'll be a while before it merges and a suitable version makes it's way into g-r
16:04:45 sfinucan I also need to drop a load of commands from nova-manage that are no longer necessary, but I figure we need a cycle of deprecation before doing so
16:05:23 sfinucan How do I track that from a spec/bp perspective? specless bp for this cycle (to deprecate commands) and a specful one for Queens to do the rewrite?
16:06:44 mriedem sfinucan: we don't need a bp to deprecate commands
16:07:16 sfinucan No? Sweet. I'll re-target that for Queens so
16:09:32 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova-specs master: A spec for idempotent custom resource classe creation https://review.openstack.org/453732
16:09:38 cdent mriedem, jaypipes, edleafe ^
16:09:49 cdent feh, typo right at the start mehness
16:09:58 jaypipes cdent: cool, thanks!
16:10:23 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova-specs master: A spec for idempotent custom resource class creation https://review.openstack.org/453732
16:10:35 edleafe cdent: added
16:16:23 openstackgerrit Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.volume_detach notification https://review.openstack.org/408676
16:21:36 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Create specs directory for Queens https://review.openstack.org/453737
16:21:36 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add 'move-nova-cmds-to-cliff' spec https://review.openstack.org/433603
16:21:50 mriedem dane-fichter: i'm completely confused by how we don't end up with an empty tuple for registered types here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/351232/16/nova/objects/fields.py
16:23:47 openstackgerrit Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.volume_attach notification https://review.openstack.org/401992
16:23:49 openstackgerrit Sujitha proposed openstack/nova master: Add sync_instances action in os-cells API https://review.openstack.org/453366
16:26:25 efried mriedem The register method can stuff things into the class member REGISTERED_TYPES.
16:26:56 efried mriedem https://pastebin.com/aECAcEFK
16:28:23 mriedem is register a special method in python?
16:28:49 efried Not that I know of. Does it need to be?
16:29:07 efried It's defined on the SignatureKeyType class.
16:29:56 mriedem yeah, but without calling SignatureKeyType.register, which the nova code doesn't do, how does REGISTERED_TYPES get populated?
16:30:28 efried mriedem Well, okay, I wasn't assuming we knew for sure that register never got called anywhere...
16:32:41 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova-specs master: A spec for idempotent custom resource class creation https://review.openstack.org/453732
16:34:01 mriedem it seems to work, i just don't know how
16:34:52 openstackgerrit Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.volume_detach notification https://review.openstack.org/408676
16:35:13 mriedem efried: dane-fichter: ah import time fun https://github.com/openstack/cursive/blob/0.1.2/cursive/signature_utils.py#L172-L180
16:35:47 efried I was gonna say, "must get called from within cursive somewhere". But I would have been grasping at straws ;-)
16:42:22 openstackgerrit Anusha Unnam proposed openstack/nova master: Add description to policies in security_group_default_rules.py https://review.openstack.org/453748
16:49:05 johnthetubaguy aunnam sneti this is the keystone spec I was raising about the additional roles spec: https://review.openstack.org/453739
16:50:32 aunnam johnthetubaguy thanks, will review it
16:50:35 sneti johnthetubaguy, will check that..
16:56:30 openstackgerrit Sujitha proposed openstack/nova master: Add sync_instances action in os-cells API https://review.openstack.org/453366
17:06:32 openstackgerrit Bob Ball proposed openstack/nova master: Use physical utilisation for cached images https://review.openstack.org/353862
17:07:27 mriedem melwitt: so just for closure, were you going to amend the placement usages spec to use a new /usages handler rather than /allocations?
17:07:50 melwitt mriedem: yes. will do that today
17:07:56 mriedem ok cool
17:08:01 mriedem i got confused by all of the options
17:08:13 mriedem plus, someone jangled some keys in front of me
17:09:10 mriedem sdague: well with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/447728/ merged i think we're ready for novaclient 8.0.0 which drops all of the proxy crap

Earlier   Later