| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-04-19 | |||
| 16:12:12 | bauzas | dansmith: maybe | |
| 16:12:19 | bauzas | if we try to merge quotas with placement | |
| 16:12:25 | dansmith | bauzas: we're doing that | |
| 16:12:32 | bauzas | I know | |
| 16:12:36 | bauzas | speaking out loud | |
| 16:12:53 | hypothermic_cat | lyarwood: additional tests are on their way for the base detach changes | |
| 16:13:17 | mriedem | dansmith: bauzas: melwitt: ok i didn't think about that part, so reply in the spec i suppose | |
| 16:13:30 | bauzas | dansmith: FWIW I tried to advocate way earlier this morning that I'm in favor of decrementing the total left amount than fixing the allocation | |
| 16:13:40 | hypothermic_cat | lyarwood: I'm stuck a bit too this week, I need to find more people, who could look into the code :) | |
| 16:14:25 | bauzas | dansmith: unrelated, I have a couple of comments on your cells-aware series | |
| 16:14:40 | bauzas | both can be me being wrong | |
| 16:16:15 | rfolco | cdent, quick question: I am doing a cleanup on inventory.py replacing http error msg from db api with specific messages, like here: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/placement/handlers/inventory.py#L409 - should we do this for other cases like BadRequest ? | |
| 16:17:03 | dansmith | bauzas: one is why my devstack patch is failing :D | |
| 16:17:18 | bauzas | I'M NOT WRONG, WOOOOT! | |
| 16:18:10 | dansmith | bauzas: no, you're still wrong | |
| 16:18:10 | cdent | rfolco: just a sec, catching up | |
| 16:18:20 | dansmith | no t-shirt for you | |
| 16:19:03 | bauzas | dansmith: L71 ? | |
| 16:19:07 | bauzas | how come ? | |
| 16:19:21 | dansmith | bauzas: no, L71.5 | |
| 16:19:31 | rfolco | cdent, more context: would be an extension of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/436773 | |
| 16:19:51 | bauzas | dansmith: excuse my ignorance, but what is L71.5 ? | |
| 16:19:54 | cdent | rfolco: yeah, the general idea is to not expose the database error in the exception message, throughout the placement service | |
| 16:20:08 | dansmith | bauzas: the line between 71 and 72 | |
| 16:20:25 | cdent | rfolco: sometimes the exception message will already be good, other times not. it depends on the exception that's coming from the object level: it's inconsistent | |
| 16:20:35 | bauzas | like the platform 9 3/4 ? | |
| 16:20:49 | cdent | rfolco: in general the goal is to make the message that the end user sees less annoying, so use that as your guide | |
| 16:20:49 | melwitt | yeeeah | |
| 16:21:06 | cdent | rfolco: but unfortunately I need to go, house guests just showed up... | |
| 16:21:07 | dansmith | bauzas: I don't get that reference, but.. probably? | |
| 16:21:18 | rfolco | cdent, that helped. Thanks. | |
| 16:21:42 | melwitt | dansmith: you don't know ... harry potter?? | |
| 16:21:48 | cdent | rfolco: add me to the review(s) when stuff's ready please, so I can be sure to look at them and also to add them to the weekly email | |
| 16:21:55 | dansmith | melwitt: never seen it | |
| 16:22:01 | melwitt | omg | |
| 16:22:14 | bauzas | melwitt: seriously, he doesn't loose a lot | |
| 16:22:17 | dansmith | melwitt: well, I watched five minutes of it, and couldn't handle it | |
| 16:22:35 | dansmith | LOTR and harry potter, I just can't stomach | |
| 16:22:49 | bauzas | dansmith: dammit, the platform 9 3/4 was shown at 10 mins after the beginning | |
| 16:22:58 | dansmith | oh well :) | |
| 16:24:10 | bauzas | either way, I have to change my glasses this week | |
| 16:24:23 | bauzas | so probably I'll review better | |
| 16:25:56 | dansmith | bauzas: in my defense, the tests did add a cell, but I neglected to create the instance in the new cell, so .. I intended to have coverage to prove I was doing the right thing, I just failed.. twice | |
| 16:35:52 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Mock timeout in test__get_node_console_with_reset_wait_timeout https://review.openstack.org/458161 | |
| 16:37:32 | mriedem | dansmith: is this for the server groups thing? | |
| 16:37:41 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 16:38:13 | mriedem | could just write a functional test instead, | |
| 16:38:21 | mriedem | i'm finding that's easier with some of the api driven stuff and multi-cell | |
| 16:38:43 | dansmith | mriedem: this one is basically functional.. uses the actual db | |
| 16:38:57 | dansmith | mriedem: it didn't catch it because I made the same mistake in the test as the code | |
| 16:45:10 | melwitt | mriedem: I wonder if there's a bug in the backoff looping timer, it doesn't make sense that it wouldn't time out at all | |
| 16:45:34 | melwitt | it's supposed to end early if the backoff would put it over the specified timeout | |
| 16:46:14 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make server groups api aware of multiple cells for membership https://review.openstack.org/457338 | |
| 16:46:15 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Clean up ClientRouter debt https://review.openstack.org/444487 | |
| 16:46:15 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Sort CellMappingList.get_all() for safety https://review.openstack.org/443174 | |
| 16:46:18 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add workaround to disable group policy check upcall https://review.openstack.org/442736 | |
| 16:46:21 | mriedem | melwitt: i didn't dig into how the jitter stuff works in there | |
| 16:46:41 | melwitt | yeah. I'm looking at it out of curiosity | |
| 16:46:50 | mriedem | melwitt: i figured maybe there was a bug in the fake stub method logic | |
| 16:47:00 | mriedem | but didn't dig into it | |
| 16:47:06 | melwitt | hm, yeah | |
| 16:47:32 | melwitt | I was thinking we shouldn't be doing real timeouts anyway, but it doesn't make sense that it wouldn't time out that way too | |
| 16:50:24 | openstackgerrit | Feodor Tersin proposed openstack/nova master: Implement ScaleIO image backend https://review.openstack.org/407440 | |
| 16:53:50 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Fix typo in deprecate-os-hosts spec https://review.openstack.org/458165 | |
| 17:13:45 | dansmith | gdi py35 | |
| 17:41:16 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Deprecate os-hosts API https://review.openstack.org/456504 | |
| 17:41:29 | mriedem | ^ is doctastic | |
| 17:54:42 | openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/458185 | |
| 17:56:29 | openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/os-vif master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/451049 | |
| 18:12:54 | openstackgerrit | Steve Noyes proposed openstack/nova master: Add Cinder V3 Detach calls https://review.openstack.org/438750 | |
| 18:19:19 | dansmith | I see melwitt pushed up the revised quotapalooza | |
| 18:19:44 | dansmith | I'm glad, but also sad, 'cause now we have to review it | |
| 18:21:06 | mriedem | i think my afternoon just got busy with something else... | |
| 18:22:44 | mriedem | do we want/need to get the placement usages API stuff in first? | |
| 18:22:49 | mriedem | before counting quotas? | |
| 18:23:05 | dansmith | I think she's got it so it can count inefficiently without placement | |
| 18:23:06 | dansmith | iirc | |
| 18:23:24 | mriedem | alright | |
| 18:23:25 | dansmith | we really can't miss landing this this cycle, so whatever makes the most sense time-wise I guess | |
| 18:23:29 | mriedem | i wanted something easier to review | |
| 18:23:40 | melwitt | sorry peeps | |
| 18:23:41 | mriedem | oh we can miss it | |
| 18:23:48 | mriedem | we can miss it real good | |
| 18:28:37 | hypothermic_cat | lyarwood: mriedem: johnthetubaguy: this one for the new detach flow is ready for review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/438750/ | |
| 18:28:45 | hypothermic_cat | I will add it to the etherpad too | |
| 18:29:25 | mriedem | ok | |
| 18:29:46 | mriedem | hypothermic_cat: doesn't the commit message need updating? | |
| 18:31:30 | hypothermic_cat | mriedem: bah, yes, that should be too :) | |
| 18:31:42 | mriedem | let me go through the rest first | |
| 18:31:54 | hypothermic_cat | mriedem: or well, actually I updated it | |
| 18:32:07 | mriedem | "for each case of terminate_connection" is wrong | |
| 18:32:45 | hypothermic_cat | mriedem: but I can remove the "overview" part from it as it seems to be confusing | |
| 18:33:14 | mriedem | yeah, just don't change anything yet | |
| 18:39:17 | mriedem | hypothermic_cat: there you go, comments inline | |
| 18:41:35 | mriedem | hypothermic_cat: i'm confused about the changes, are they not in a series? | |
| 18:42:14 | mriedem | you're going to have conflicts if those aren't done in a series | |
| 18:42:19 | hypothermic_cat | mriedem: I tried not to have a like 8 patches long series to be able to get more hands on the code, etc | |
| 18:42:25 | hypothermic_cat | mriedem: that's a pain to maintain | |
| 18:42:31 | mriedem | conflicts aren't fun either | |
| 18:42:48 | hypothermic_cat | these are small changes there won't be that much conflict | |