Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-07-20
14:41:45 sdague http://logs.openstack.org/02/485602/1/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/0c29b8a/logs/screen-c-api.txt.gz#_Jul_20_13_20_35_279507
14:41:47 mriedem even w/o global request id, we need the request id for basic debug
14:42:10 mriedem is that "time: 0.5609260" ?
14:42:12 sdague that's what a current eventlet wsgi log line looks like
14:42:13 sdague yeh
14:42:22 mriedem i don't think i ever use that
14:42:49 mriedem it would be nice to know for profiling i suppose
14:42:54 sdague http://logs.openstack.org/02/485602/1/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/0c29b8a/logs/screen-n-api.txt.gz#_Jul_20_13_20_03_249571 is what the request_log patch makes the nova lines look like
14:42:59 mriedem if you have some requests taking 30 seconds or something
14:43:02 sdague so, 3 is pretty minor
14:43:16 sdague the real issue is #2, in how we get this in the hands of people
14:43:43 sdague because right now, the WIP patch requires this - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485602/1/etc/nova/api-paste.ini
14:44:00 mriedem well, there is something to consider there,
14:44:01 mriedem which is,
14:44:03 mriedem wait for it,
14:44:18 mriedem this isn't a problem if you're running nova-api under eventlet, yes?
14:44:23 sdague correct
14:44:36 mriedem so if/when you move nova-api to uwsgi or apache,
14:44:42 mriedem you're going to be changing some config anyway, yes?
14:45:06 sdague maybe, though up until this point we've never told people they have to change this stuff
14:45:30 mriedem this stuff == api-paste.ini?
14:45:32 sdague yes
14:45:49 mriedem because changing nova-api to run under uwsgi is going to require changes to someone's config management / deploy tooling
14:45:52 mriedem just like it did in devstack
14:46:09 sdague sure
14:46:10 mriedem so it's not like this is some trivial change that doesn't require manual intervention to start running nova-api this way
14:46:31 sdague sure, so you are feeling that upgrade note and the paste change is fine?
14:46:48 mriedem so i don't think it's the end of the world to say, if you're going to start running nova-api under uwsgi AND you want the request IDs logged for debug (which we assume you do if you're not crazy), then you have to also do this other thing
14:46:59 mriedem with 8 days to FF, i'm feeling fine about that yes
14:47:09 mriedem wait what day is it?
14:47:11 mriedem 7 days to FF
14:47:24 sdague ok, I'll proceed forward based on that
14:47:57 mriedem if you wanted to tinker with sliding something into existing middleware that is smart enough to know if it's running under eventlet or not and auto enable, that'd be cool but probably queens at this point
14:47:58 sdague the functional parts of the patch should be ready for review - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485602/1/nova/api/openstack/requestlog.py
14:48:21 sdague yeh, I'll put that as stretch goal
14:48:55 mriedem is there any existing oslo.middleware stuff that all/most services use that we could do the auto enable thing in there so everyone else gets it for free?
14:49:00 mriedem and doesn't have to copy the solution around?
14:49:11 mriedem noting that today is release freeze for oslo lis
14:49:13 mriedem *libs
14:49:22 sdague I don't think that there is
14:49:29 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/oslo.middleware/blob/master/oslo_middleware/request_id.py ?
14:50:08 sdague maybe, not everyone uses that
14:50:26 sdague but, regardless, I don't think we could get it in and through that process
14:50:33 mriedem sure,
14:50:34 sdague in the time alloted
14:50:42 sdague one of the challenges about fixed time boxes
14:50:46 dansmith ...with 146 things in the check queue
14:50:48 mriedem so maybe that's the other thing for queens is moving this into oslo.middleware so others can just pick it up from there
14:50:48 openstackgerrit Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Remove check_detach https://review.openstack.org/446671
14:50:49 openstackgerrit Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Implement new attach Cinder flow https://review.openstack.org/330285
14:52:14 jangutter Newbie question: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485382/ failed a check in the gate (last time it failed a different check). Does this kinda thing happen often when upping requirements.txt?
14:59:43 sdague mriedem: yeh, it's kind of going to depend on the way wsgi bits are done, which is not standardized
15:00:02 sdague honestly, the ideal might be if oslo.service actually abstracted this stuff away
15:00:13 sdague but... that's got other challenges
15:05:39 dansmith melwitt: remind me why those need to be remotable? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/410945/58/nova/objects/quotas.py@62
15:07:32 dansmith like, I thought we had removed all of the quota calls by this point that need to be done from compute or non-db-having services
15:09:31 gibi mriedem: I cannot joint to the nova meeting today. Could you cover the notification subteam part?
15:10:11 mdbooth melwitt: Addressed your comments on this patch with a test: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479801/
15:10:30 mdbooth Jenkins -1 is bogus, btw. Rechecked it, but following patch has passed.
15:11:13 mdbooth melwitt: Incidentally following patch is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485601/ which is a minor cleanup to your quotas patch
15:11:38 mdbooth s/minor/trivial/
15:22:17 mriedem gibi: sure
15:23:00 openstackgerrit Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Implement new attach Cinder flow https://review.openstack.org/330285
15:27:07 mriedem sdague: are you going to recap the plan to the ML?
15:27:20 gibi mriedem: thanks
15:27:28 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: placement: alloc candidates only shared resources https://review.openstack.org/484900
15:28:13 mriedem jaypipes: do we need anything in here to get released in os-traits today? https://review.openstack.org/#/q/os-traits+status:open
15:28:16 mriedem because today is the big day
15:28:26 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Adjust test_resize_down_revert to account for counting quotas https://review.openstack.org/484152
15:28:44 sdague mriedem: I can
15:28:44 mriedem maybe the reqs update
15:28:59 openstackgerrit Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/os-vif master: Read datapath_type from VIF object https://review.openstack.org/474914
15:28:59 sdague I'm going to figure out test failures first
15:29:00 jaypipes mriedem: nope
15:29:11 mriedem ok i'll get the req update in and then release it
15:29:17 jaypipes mriedem: danke
15:33:14 mriedem sdague: another thing to consider, report a bug for this request id logging thing and then we can tag it pike-rc-potential for tracking
15:33:18 mriedem i'm starting to tag things for the rc
15:35:11 jaypipes sean-k-mooney: ralonsoh's https://review.openstack.org/#/c/474914/ is good to go. feel free to +2 if agree.
15:35:19 openstackgerrit OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/485634
15:35:41 ralonsoh jaypipes, sean-k-moone: thanks!
15:35:53 mriedem jaypipes: sean-k-mooney: ralonsoh: does ^ need to be in an os-vif release for pike?
15:35:57 mriedem because we released os-vif yesterday
15:36:11 jaypipes mriedem: I don't believe so, no.
15:36:25 mriedem ok, it's also dependent on a neutron change with -1s and test failures
15:36:37 jaypipes mriedem: right.
15:36:59 jaypipes mriedem: os-vif was good yesterday when it was released.
15:37:01 ralonsoh mriedem, jaypipes: well, this patch solves a bug for OVS userspace
15:37:21 mriedem ralonsoh: at this point it's not going to get released for pike
15:37:28 mriedem unless it's later backported
15:37:31 ralonsoh mriedem; no, not now
15:37:51 sdague mriedem: sure
15:38:25 jaypipes ralonsoh: as mriedem said, there is a dependent neutron patch that would need to be merged for that os-vif patch to even be workable though.
15:38:26 sean-k-mooney mriedem: need no nice to have definetly
15:39:07 jaypipes ralonsoh: well, I shouldn't say "even be workable". I meant "even be useful".
15:39:35 ralonsoh jaypipes: yes, this bug needed changes in 4 projects. I don't think is going to land in Pike
15:39:48 jaypipes cdent: hey, just to repeat what I said on that bug report... really excellent investigative work on that sorted(sharing_providers.items()..) thing.
15:40:08 jaypipes cdent: I had spent hours looking at the SQL generated going to myself "there's nothing wrong with this SQL... :("
15:40:18 cdent thanks jaypipes, it was really because of gibi
15:40:21 jaypipes cdent: and your comment sparked a renewed look at the JOIN order.

Earlier   Later