| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-05-17 | |||
| 15:11:44 | bauzas | cdent: well, technically, we said to return alternatives by the number of retries | |
| 15:11:53 | johnthetubaguy | seems like you want the retry conf set centrally not different on every compute node, thats the bit that matters I guess? | |
| 15:11:59 | bauzas | cdent: and atm we have that flag in the scheduler group | |
| 15:12:29 | bauzas | although it's settable per compute given it's used by the scheduler.utils module | |
| 15:12:44 | johnthetubaguy | bauzas: hmm, joy | |
| 15:13:01 | edleafe | johnthetubaguy: by not passing the number of hosts to return to the scheduler, it doesn't matter what config file it's set in. | |
| 15:13:18 | edleafe | it's set and unchangeable for any other service | |
| 15:13:18 | bauzas | again, I beg people to review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/465175/ if they have matters | |
| 15:13:53 | edleafe | it seems like since keeping the interface clean is more work, we'll just keep doing things the old way with tying scheduler to nova | |
| 15:14:04 | edleafe | which dansmith says is what we're going to do | |
| 15:14:37 | johnthetubaguy | I am all for keeping the interface clean, it just feels like that belongs inside the scheduler to me, but I am kinda just stuck in the old ways I guess | |
| 15:15:08 | edleafe | johnthetubaguy: so you don't ever see any service other than nova ever ever ever using the scheduler? | |
| 15:16:31 | johnthetubaguy | edleafe: basically no, I could see another seam being added to extract the filter/weigher stuff thats been cut and paste all over the place, and some placement helper utils, but that feels like a set of problems we should ignore for now, so we can make quicker progress | |
| 15:17:03 | edleafe | johnthetubaguy: agree that we shouldn't spend time on it now | |
| 15:17:04 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: agree | |
| 15:17:15 | edleafe | johnthetubaguy: disagree that we should actively make things worse | |
| 15:17:32 | edleafe | worse == tighter coupling | |
| 15:19:02 | johnthetubaguy | right now there is random util dust sprinkled all over, thats bad, I need to go review the proposed code | |
| 15:20:02 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: johnthetubaguy out of interest do you ever see a case where i would be allowed to pass a set of claime to nova boot? not saying that is desireable but has that come up as a topic before? | |
| 15:20:16 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: it has | |
| 15:20:25 | johnthetubaguy | sean-k-mooney: yeah, came up with the watcher folks I think | |
| 15:20:49 | johnthetubaguy | reservations, etc | |
| 15:20:52 | sean-k-mooney | cool was any desion reached on that or was it defered to later | |
| 15:21:02 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: what do you think? :P | |
| 15:21:12 | sean-k-mooney | much later haha | |
| 15:21:14 | dansmith | we can't even agree which color to paint the bike shed | |
| 15:21:27 | dansmith | well, some of us can, but .. :P | |
| 15:23:37 | sean-k-mooney | ok cool as long as we can at least all agree to use the placement api for track resources and allocations of those resources thats better then what we have today | |
| 15:24:24 | sean-k-mooney | well thats perhaps unfair neutron is already using it for ip pools for the l3 routing stuff so we have made more progress then just agreeing to use the placement api | |
| 15:27:59 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: by the way you summit talk on the cells v2 work was really good. jays talks on the placement apis were also good to watch | |
| 15:28:11 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: thanks :) | |
| 15:43:42 | cfriesen | kashyap: what would you think of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/461456 ? The rationale being that it's defined as a realtime mask so if the user specifies "1-2" they should get vCPUs 1 and 2 as realtime. | |
| 15:45:41 | sfinucan | cfriesen: I took a look at it. Looks sensible to me. Do we document support image metadata anywhere though? | |
| 15:45:47 | sfinucan | ...or is that up to Glance to do? | |
| 15:47:40 | sfinucan | dansmith: RE: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/408242/, what would be the preferred pattern - | |
| 15:48:03 | sfinucan | hardening all the access to various InstanceNUMACell attributes to check if the attribute is set first | |
| 15:48:09 | johnthetubaguy | sfinucan: did you see the image meta object stuff? | |
| 15:48:23 | sfinucan | or always setting those attributes anywhere we create an object? | |
| 15:48:25 | johnthetubaguy | sfinucan: we should probably generate docs from that at some point | |
| 15:48:38 | cfriesen | sfinucan: not actually sure | |
| 15:48:39 | sfinucan | johnthetubaguy: To which "stuff" do you refer? :) | |
| 15:49:01 | johnthetubaguy | sfinucan: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/image_meta.py | |
| 15:49:38 | sfinucan | johnthetubaguy: Oh, yeah - I knew where that was defined, alright. I meant docs that you don't need to read the code for :) | |
| 15:50:22 | johnthetubaguy | sfinucan: we should generate some docs off that I think, I suspect a few have got into the admin guides, but unsure on the details there | |
| 15:50:39 | cfriesen | sfinucane: glance has this https://docs.openstack.org/developer/glance/common-image-properties.html but there's not much there | |
| 15:50:40 | johnthetubaguy | sfinucan: its better than extra specs though... | |
| 15:51:25 | cfriesen | sfinucan: johnthetubaguy: image_meta.py just says "CPU mask indicates which vCPUs will have realtime enable" which doesn't really match the current code (hence my patch) | |
| 15:51:41 | dansmith | sfinucan: what do you mean? those patches do the right thing.. we merged one already right? | |
| 15:51:51 | openstackgerrit | Daniel Gonzalez Nothnagel proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Get disk size of instance in separate process https://review.openstack.org/465653 | |
| 15:52:03 | sfinucan | johnthetubaguy: I'll go look for stuff now. Admin guide seems like the correct place to put them, even though we're going to move that into nova soon | |
| 15:52:55 | sfinucan | dansmith: Aye, but those patches that merged mix the two. https://review.openstack.org/gitweb?p=openstack/nova.git;a=commitdiff;h=99f3bbc1ac7ddcde36931f590b6df3811e596d8c | |
| 15:53:32 | sfinucan | dansmith: So in some cases, we've done "if ('key' in object) and object.key:" | |
| 15:53:52 | sfinucan | ...but in others, we just set the various fields to None in the tests, sidestepping the issue | |
| 15:54:15 | dansmith | sfinucan: being defensive in the code that uses those fields is the wy | |
| 15:54:17 | dansmith | *way | |
| 15:54:33 | sfinucan | OK, I'll do that so | |
| 15:54:36 | dansmith | sfinucan: i.e. the "if foo in obj and obj.foo | |
| 15:54:43 | dansmith | sfinucan: cool, thanks for picking those back up | |
| 15:54:51 | sfinucan | dansmith: no problemo | |
| 16:05:47 | mriedem_afk | rabel_b1: you can have global default quotas (limits), project-specific default quotas, and then just project-specific quotas, and i understand that the latter two are confusing, and i'm not sure if/how we treat them differently, unless you have default project limits and user-specific limits within that project | |
| 16:06:22 | mriedem | mkoderer: dgonzalez: so anytime anything hits https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py#L7025 in the compute it locks up the entire process? | |
| 16:06:41 | mriedem | mkoderer: dgonzalez: because that method is called from a few different operations | |
| 16:08:48 | rabel_b1 | mriedem: ok, thank you very much. | |
| 16:09:36 | mriedem | dgonzalez: ah i see your patch now | |
| 16:43:59 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing for tagged nic attachment https://review.openstack.org/415622 | |
| 16:44:01 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Delete nic metadata when detaching interface https://review.openstack.org/435387 | |
| 16:44:03 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Libvirt support for tagged volume attachment https://review.openstack.org/418100 | |
| 16:44:08 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Delete disk metadata when detaching volume https://review.openstack.org/435082 | |
| 16:44:15 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing for tagged volume attachment https://review.openstack.org/391941 | |
| 16:44:16 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: API support for tagged device attachment https://review.openstack.org/376021 | |
| 16:44:29 | openstackgerrit | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: do not set vcpu_pin elements when virt_type=qemu https://review.openstack.org/465160 | |
| 16:47:15 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing for tagged nic attachment https://review.openstack.org/415622 | |
| 16:47:17 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Delete nic metadata when detaching interface https://review.openstack.org/435387 | |
| 16:47:19 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Libvirt support for tagged volume attachment https://review.openstack.org/418100 | |
| 16:47:24 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Delete disk metadata when detaching volume https://review.openstack.org/435082 | |
| 16:47:31 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing for tagged volume attachment https://review.openstack.org/391941 | |
| 16:47:32 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: API support for tagged device attachment https://review.openstack.org/376021 | |
| 16:47:36 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Libvirt support for tagged nic attachment https://review.openstack.org/415520 | |
| 17:04:23 | cfriesen | where does ServerExternalEvents run? is this part of nova-api? | |
| 17:05:43 | cfriesen | bah, never mind, just noticed the full path to the file | |
| 17:11:37 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Add a method signature test for all virt drivers https://review.openstack.org/465676 | |
| 17:12:26 | mdbooth | Honestly I was expecting that to find things. Surprised it didn't. | |
| 17:14:15 | mdbooth | lyarwood: Added ^^^ when I noticed your change to swap_volume, also your previous reluctance to change detach_volume. This test should make those things easier. | |
| 17:20:15 | artom | mdbooth, I thought we already tested virt drivers's method signatures... Were some drivers missing from the list? | |
| 17:22:08 | mdbooth | artom: Where do we test it? | |
| 17:22:28 | mdbooth | Although that would explain why they all match :) | |
| 17:22:46 | artom | mdbooth, ah, I think they're individual tests in each driver | |
| 17:23:05 | artom | http://paste.openstack.org/show/609828/ | |
| 17:23:14 | artom | I know I remembered getting method signature errors | |
| 17:25:43 | mdbooth | That's incredibly similar to mine, except not recursive | |
| 17:25:52 | mdbooth | I needed recursive for the volume drivers | |
| 17:26:04 | mdbooth | Although I hadn't noticed that existed already | |
| 17:26:31 | mdbooth | I wonder why it doesn't have to handle wrapped methods | |
| 17:28:41 | artom | mdbooth, I agree your way is better - it doesn't depend on each driver doing their own tests correctly | |
| 17:28:52 | mdbooth | Ah... HyperV munges it. | |
| 17:29:09 | mdbooth | artom: Meh, it's only important that it's checked, tbh. | |
| 17:29:44 | artom | mdbooth, I suppose the only issue with the current tests is if a new virt driver gets added and forgets them | |
| 17:29:48 | artom | But that doesn't seem likely | |
| 17:30:12 | mdbooth | Well powervm.PowerVMDriver already wasn't added to the DriverMethodTestCase | |
| 17:30:13 | artom | Also, you've included PowerVM | |