Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-07-26
14:44:43 dansmith mriedem: I was rushing
14:45:42 sdague mriedem: looking
14:45:45 mriedem why do we have: local nomulticellflag="$1"
14:45:50 mriedem in start_nova_compute
14:45:55 mriedem nothing passes a variable to that function
14:46:03 dansmith mriedem: yes, grenade does
14:46:07 dansmith mriedem: and ironic's grenade does
14:46:18 sdague mriedem: so what is your concern there?
14:46:19 mriedem oh grenade
14:46:41 mriedem sdague: was trying to sort out if that's coming from something within nova, since we do use pkg_resources.parse_version, but nowhere near that code
14:47:17 dansmith mriedem: jlvillal was struggling with that in o.vo recently too
14:47:18 sdague mriedem: stevedore probably
14:47:25 dansmith something changed in setuptools I think
14:50:08 sdague mriedem: actually, I think it's pbr
14:52:11 sdague let me see if I can trigger a deeper stack warn to figure out exactly where
14:58:50 sdague dansmith: for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/487443/2/lib/nova why isn't the answer to disable multicell?
14:59:40 dansmith sdague: not sure what you mean.. default=True=do setup multiple tiering.. set to false will not do that
15:00:07 dansmith maybe my logic needs inverting to make more sense? like disable=True?
15:00:31 mriedem note we aren't actually multi-cell yet
15:00:35 mriedem we're multi-tier
15:00:57 dansmith mriedem: well, you could multi-cell with this, we just don't configure it that way
15:01:14 mriedem dansmith: so i can post a WIP to set NOVA_NUM_CELLS=2 and it should work?
15:01:36 dansmith mriedem: it should configure multiple cells, but not sure it will work :)
15:01:47 dansmith mriedem: you need NUM_CELLS=2 and the CELL_INDEX=2 for the third node
15:01:53 mriedem could tease out some interesting bugs we don't know about yet
15:02:16 mriedem where is CELL_INDEX?
15:02:16 dansmith well, I didn't know we had three node jobs until you told me yesterday
15:02:49 dansmith I rememberd the name wrong, but it's this: https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/blob/master/lib/nova#L66-L68
15:03:45 mriedem couldn't that just be: NOVA_CPU_CELL=${NOVA_CPU_CELL:-$NOVA_NUM_CELLS} ?
15:03:48 dansmith I just want to say that I wish we had taken my original suggestion to call cellsv2 something other than cells
15:03:49 mriedem are they always the same?
15:03:57 sdague ok, I'm trying to figure out a way to explain this in stackrc that isn't going to require poking people in irc.
15:04:03 dansmith no,
15:04:16 dansmith mriedem: you need it to be different on each node you want to be in a different cell
15:05:02 mriedem ah ok
15:05:04 sdague so, the fleetify patch creates a conductor per compute.
15:05:10 sdague plus the api conductor
15:05:11 mriedem conductor per node
15:05:16 dansmith condutor per cell
15:05:26 mriedem well,
15:05:31 sdague right, it's good we're all on the same page :)
15:05:32 mriedem not really
15:05:45 mriedem dansmith: today the multinode job with this change is 1 cell
15:05:46 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Add requirement for os-service-types https://review.openstack.org/487471
15:06:01 mriedem there is a cell conductor and super conductor
15:06:02 dansmith mriedem: it's conductor per cell, plus one super conductor
15:06:02 mriedem yeah,
15:06:03 sdague mriedem: right, so 1 compute conductor + 1 api conductor, right ?
15:06:06 mriedem and the subnodes talk to the cell conductor
15:06:09 mriedem api talks to super conductor
15:06:28 mriedem fwiw this is why i wrote a todo to doc this in devstack later
15:06:48 mriedem because we have 3 nova confs now and multiple conductors so debugging it is a challenge at first
15:06:55 openstackgerrit OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/487473
15:06:57 sdague so, if we introduced this as CELLSV2_SETUP=allinone
15:06:59 dansmith mriedem: trying to help by starting that nova doc with diagrams of course
15:07:04 mriedem dansmith: yup
15:07:09 sdague CELLSV2_SETUP=condpercell
15:07:09 mriedem that's higher priority IMO anyway
15:07:38 sdague or something, then we could global switch there?
15:07:42 dansmith sdague: if it wasn't for ironic (and grenade) I'd say we don't need a flag
15:07:56 sdague dansmith: sure, ironic is always going to be broken this way?
15:08:01 dansmith sdague: and we really don't want people doing the allinone if possible
15:08:11 dansmith no
15:08:41 sdague what's the ironic path fix here?
15:08:41 dansmith ironic will stop being broken when we get the claims patch in,
15:08:56 dansmith and when we have proper reschedules (which we've punted at this point) then double fixed
15:09:28 mriedem 1. ironic sets the tiered=False flag temporarily in devstack-plugin-ironic,
15:09:30 mriedem 2. we land https://review.openstack.org/#/c/483566/
15:09:34 mriedem 3. ironic reverts #1
15:09:35 mriedem right?
15:09:45 dansmith technically yes
15:10:02 dansmith although since we punted on reschedules,
15:10:03 cdent If any core types have gaps between wtf-ing at cellsv2 and claims in the scheduler, there’s a stack of api-ref stuff for placement where at least the first few are ready to go: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/474550/
15:10:06 dansmith I think it's probably a good idea to let people setup devstack in this older configuration for the time being,
15:10:14 dansmith because otherwise they can't reschedule
15:10:31 mriedem are these ironic multi-node jobs?
15:10:38 mriedem or just ironic being multi-node by design
15:10:41 mriedem because of the 1:M thing
15:10:55 dansmith well, ironic multinode jobs, but not sure if it's multi-compute or just multi-ironic-node
15:11:18 dansmith either requires a reschedule, which is the problem
15:11:23 mriedem that's a good point about reschedules
15:12:02 dansmith mriedem: sdague: you want to hangout to hash this over?
15:12:09 dansmith sdague hasn't said anything in a few minutes, may be very confused
15:12:40 mriedem i just left a comment that it might be good to mention the reschedule thing,
15:12:45 mriedem if you're doing tiered and multiple computes
15:14:07 bauzas mriedem: 11 comments in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/485435/6 but only 2 I care
15:14:53 bauzas mriedem: tl;dr should we mention in the relnote that nova wouldn't support disabling non-compute services, and why should we having two different representative strings for a service object?
15:15:03 sdague dansmith: sorry, I was writing a patch
15:15:11 sdague I can do a hangout as well
15:15:37 sdague dansmith: I was thinking, change the devstack setup to this https://review.openstack.org/487478
15:16:05 sdague because as much as I don't like this mode switch, I like it even less if there are 2 different ways to do it
15:16:19 dansmith sdague: we have to fix grenade for that first
15:16:24 sdague dansmith: yep
15:16:29 sdague working on that patch right now
15:16:39 dansmith sdague: agreed about the two ways, I was just trying to unbreak the ironic people quickly
15:17:14 dansmith vdrok: following?
15:17:37 vdrok reading
15:18:02 dansmith vdrok: basically, sdague hates it when I play with his toys
15:19:03 mriedem here is the 2-cell goody btw https://review.openstack.org/487479
15:19:36 dansmith mriedem: that's just going to put all the nodes into the same cell again right?

Earlier   Later