| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-05-23 | |||
| 16:06:07 | mriedem | yes | |
| 16:06:29 | mriedem | well i know they are neutron, | |
| 16:06:34 | mriedem | i assume they have a single port on the instance | |
| 16:06:40 | mriedem | auto-created by nova when creating the server | |
| 16:08:03 | cfriesen | is the test using get-me-a-network? or could it be booting with no port? | |
| 16:09:33 | mriedem | no it's not those | |
| 16:11:15 | cfriesen | mriedem: on of our neutron guys says it might happen if nova didn't update the host_id, or if there was an issue with vif-unplug/vif-plug on either side. | |
| 16:14:40 | mriedem | if that happened, i'd think the job would fail | |
| 16:14:44 | mriedem | or we'd see errors in the logs | |
| 16:14:56 | mriedem | granted, these tests don't actually try to ssh into the guest once it's migrated to the target host | |
| 16:20:44 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: console: introduce basic framework for security proxying https://review.openstack.org/345396 | |
| 16:20:45 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: console: introduce the VeNCrypt RFB authentication scheme https://review.openstack.org/345398 | |
| 16:20:45 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: console: introduce framework for RFB authentication https://review.openstack.org/345397 | |
| 16:20:46 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: console: provide an RFB security proxy implementation https://review.openstack.org/345399 | |
| 16:24:28 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: doc: start a FAQs section for cells v2 https://review.openstack.org/467309 | |
| 16:24:31 | mriedem | kfox1111: ^ | |
| 16:24:34 | mriedem | i said i'd do it | |
| 16:28:31 | edleafe | jaypipes: regarding your comment on UUID passing in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/465171/, that was my original approach. However, dansmith preferred to see it as an additional RPC param | |
| 16:29:02 | jaypipes | edleafe: well, based on this ML thread, we may have to rethink this all anyway... | |
| 16:30:32 | edleafe | jaypipes: not sure I follow (I'm still catching up from PyCon) | |
| 16:30:59 | edleafe | jaypipes: We can claim in the scheduler to make sure we have at least one sufficient host | |
| 16:31:24 | edleafe | jaypipes: and then return that host and some 'alternates' | |
| 16:31:52 | edleafe | that would get passed down to the cell, which could retry an alternate in the event of a local build failure | |
| 16:32:09 | edleafe | Where is the problem under discussion? | |
| 16:32:21 | jaypipes | edleafe: I'm referring to this thread http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-May/117221.html | |
| 16:32:51 | jaypipes | edleafe: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2017-May/013464.html | |
| 16:33:05 | edleafe | jaypipes: yes, I've read all that thread | |
| 16:33:06 | jaypipes | edleafe: I'd like to get rid of retries entirely. | |
| 16:33:08 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Fix live migration devstack hook for multicell environment https://review.openstack.org/458537 | |
| 16:33:08 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: De-complicate some of the instance delete path https://review.openstack.org/458636 | |
| 16:33:09 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Target cell on local delete https://review.openstack.org/464059 | |
| 16:33:23 | jaypipes | edleafe: but ops are crapping on the idea. | |
| 16:33:32 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: Add strict option to discover_hosts https://review.openstack.org/467218 | |
| 16:33:56 | edleafe | jaypipes: so wouldn't adding a list of alternates be an acceptable compromist? | |
| 16:34:04 | dansmith | edleafe: that was the compromise | |
| 16:34:14 | dansmith | edleafe: jaypipes was apparently missing that bit of context from the summit | |
| 16:34:16 | mriedem | you know, if you're providing a monthly subscription service, you'd think you'd want your website to work such that your customers can update their credit card information to actually pay you, rather than cancel their subscription, even after you've submitted a ticket and called customer service | |
| 16:34:46 | jaypipes | edleafe: I would still like to do retries (from resource allocation failures due to concurrent claims) in the scheduler. | |
| 16:35:06 | edleafe | jaypipes: yes, that's what I've done in my series | |
| 16:35:09 | dansmith | jaypipes: you shouldn't call those retries, IMHO, to avoid confusion | |
| 16:35:11 | jaypipes | edleafe: I know :) | |
| 16:35:17 | jaypipes | dansmith: touche | |
| 16:35:21 | edleafe | so what is the problem? | |
| 16:35:56 | jaypipes | edleafe: I'm still having a tantrum about not getting my way with ops. | |
| 16:35:57 | edleafe | dansmith: I like to call them 'claims' :) | |
| 16:36:06 | jaypipes | edleafe: gimme ten minutes to come to my senses please. | |
| 16:36:24 | edleafe | jaypipes: ok. Grab your blankie and open a juice pack | |
| 16:36:41 | jaypipes | thanks guys. | |
| 16:39:48 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: doc: add cells v2 FAQ on refreshing global cells cache https://review.openstack.org/467318 | |
| 16:46:24 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1692984 in neutron "VM boot fails with "TCG doesn't support requested feature: CPUID.01H:ECX.vmx"" [High,New] | |
| 16:46:24 | ihrachys | anyone seen the failure? https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1692984 | |
| 16:46:58 | mriedem | ihrachys: nope, libvirt/qemu fun | |
| 16:47:00 | mriedem | kashyap: ^ | |
| 16:47:18 | ihrachys | I am not completely sure this is the culprit. the log suggests it's a 'warning' | |
| 16:47:35 | ihrachys | so *maybe* it just spills it as part of stderr when some other failure happens. | |
| 16:47:45 | ihrachys | I am too dumb to distinguish :) | |
| 16:49:42 | mriedem | please standby, firefox is struggling to open logs | |
| 16:50:31 | mriedem | ihrachys: it definitely killed the server build http://logs.openstack.org/83/466983/1/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-linuxbridge-ubuntu-xenial/bd69e6b/logs/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz?level=TRACE#_May_23_03_04_29_688986 | |
| 16:51:55 | ihrachys | yeah, sure. I am merely saying I am not sure if the cpu flag thing is a red herring, or the culprit of the failure | |
| 16:52:35 | jaypipes | cdent: in a gabbit, can I test for greater or equal to a value? | |
| 16:52:55 | jaypipes | cdent: for example, $.traits.`len`: 2 | |
| 16:53:07 | jaypipes | cdent: can I change that to test for >= 2? | |
| 16:53:14 | cdent | maybe, I need to do some checking | |
| 16:53:34 | mriedem | ihrachys: hmm, yeah http://logstash.openstack.org/#dashboard/file/logstash.json?query=message%3A%5C%22process%20exited%20while%20connecting%20to%20monitor%3A%20warning%3A%20TCG%20doesn't%20support%20requested%20feature%3A%20CPUID.01H%3AECX.vmx%20%5Bbit%205%5D%5C%22%20AND%20tags%3A%5C%22screen-n-cpu.txt%5C%22&from=7d | |
| 16:53:41 | mriedem | ihrachys: it's definitely not 100% failure | |
| 16:53:43 | mriedem | not even close | |
| 16:56:19 | ihrachys | right. so I was thinking, maybe it's just spilled all the time, but we dump stderr on failures. but other log messages are very generic to my taste, and I needed to capture something in the bug, so... | |
| 16:57:24 | cdent | jaypipes: simple answer is "not really" but you could perhaps do a regex to get the results you want?: /[2-9]/ | |
| 16:57:58 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: doc: add cells v2 FAQ on mapping instances https://review.openstack.org/467322 | |
| 16:58:41 | cdent | jaypipes: the limitation at this point is that the RHS is that the assert is either an assertEqual or an assertRegex | |
| 16:58:41 | mriedem | pabelanger: dansmith: fyi, no one replied to my question about doing PUT for keypairs in the ops channel | |
| 17:12:16 | jaypipes | cdent: k, no prob. thx! | |
| 17:21:53 | jaypipes | mriedem, smcginnis: if it makes you feel any better (doubtful), k8s is dealing with similar feature requests and inconsistent UX around volume types. There, it's called dynamicStorageClass but the concept is virtually identical | |
| 17:22:52 | cfriesen | jaypipes: got a sched race for you to consider for placement/claims: 2 vms in server group with anti-affinity, both vms get migrated at same time, scheduler picks same host for both, both end up on same host. | |
| 17:23:23 | jaypipes | cfriesen: two trains leave New York and San Francisco, each going 60mph... | |
| 17:23:27 | cfriesen | jaypipes: make that live-migrated. ^ | |
| 17:24:10 | cfriesen | not sure how to fix this without either atomic schedule/claim or secondary check on compute and possible reschedule | |
| 17:24:34 | cfriesen | (I guess secondary check could be anywhere post-claim) | |
| 17:25:00 | jaypipes | cfriesen: we can dramatically decrease the length of time that such a decision can be made with claims in the scheduler... | |
| 17:26:18 | cfriesen | jaypipes: agreed, | |
| 17:27:49 | cfriesen | but it might still make sense to allow reschedule within the cell | |
| 17:30:45 | jaypipes | cfriesen: yes, perhaps. | |
| 17:31:00 | jaypipes | cfriesen: trying to avoid that though if possible. (doesn't look like we'll be able to, though) | |
| 17:33:53 | pabelanger | mriedem: dansmith: Ya, for now we are leaning towards updating ansible os_keypair module to support the update functionality | |
| 17:34:10 | pabelanger | then delete / create the key with same name | |
| 17:40:45 | cfriesen | jaypipes: something to consider in the above scenario...if we have an anti-affinity instance migrating from host1 to host2, we probably want to exclude *both* hosts from consideration when scheduling other instances in the same group. | |
| 17:42:27 | jaypipes | cfriesen: sure, no disagreement. | |
| 18:00:40 | ildikov | lyarwood: sfinucan: hi | |
| 18:00:46 | ildikov | lyarwood: sfinucan: if you have some time there're two patches related to the new Cinder attach/detach flow with one +2 already: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459111/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459113/ | |
| 18:00:55 | ildikov | lyarwood: sfinucan: tnx :) | |
| 18:06:48 | openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/467344 | |
| 18:10:26 | efried | jaypipes johnthetubaguy mordred Would y'all please have a look at this spec update? Been +2 for a few weeks. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/461481/ | |
| 18:12:02 | efried | But the pen IS mightier than the sword, so... | |
| 18:12:07 | jaypipes | :) | |
| 18:14:03 | jaypipes | efried: done. | |
| 18:14:10 | efried | jaypipes Thanks dude. | |
| 18:16:42 | efried | jaypipes Still on my list to ask you for that pointer to the shared resource pool code. Is that a quick answer? | |
| 18:17:17 | jaypipes | efried: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/shared-resources-pike | |
| 18:20:58 | efried | jaypipes Okay, looking through. I know you've slept (in multiple time zones) since then, so to refresh your memory on the conversation: I'm looking to get my compute driver itself to do the registration of its shared storage pool. | |
| 18:21:21 | jaypipes | efried: ah. yeah, sorry.. one sec | |