| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-07-26 | |||
| 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? | |
| 15:20:02 | dansmith | you need to set CPU_CELL=$node_number or something | |
| 15:20:36 | dansmith | this will just end up with an empty cell1, which is cool, but not much different from what we're already doing, AFAICT | |
| 15:21:19 | vdrok | dansmith: so basically CELLSV2_SETUP=singleconductor instead of NOVA_CELLS_TIER=False? | |
| 15:21:26 | dansmith | vdrok: yes | |
| 15:21:27 | mriedem | vdrok: yes | |
| 15:21:34 | mriedem | dansmith: i'd have to set that from like devstack-gate right? | |
| 15:21:41 | dansmith | mriedem: something yeah | |
| 15:21:43 | mriedem | since devstack doesn't know which subnode it is | |
| 15:21:44 | mriedem | ok | |
| 15:21:45 | dansmith | right | |
| 15:21:56 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: claim resources in placement API during schedule() https://review.openstack.org/483566 | |
| 15:21:57 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: add a retry on DBDeadlock to _set_allocations() https://review.openstack.org/487483 | |
| 15:21:58 | jaypipes | alex_xu, cdent, mriedem, dansmith: ok, added protection against DBDeadlock (separate patch) and cleaned up the one conditional with unit tests that alex_xu pointed out. ^^ | |
| 15:22:08 | jaypipes | and rebased to master that cdent wanted... | |
| 15:22:10 | dansmith | mriedem: I should have kept quiet and had you be amazed and impressed at no more failures with your patch :P | |
| 15:22:19 | vdrok | mriedem: dansmith hrm, so doing it in devstack/settings won't work? OK, will add to devstack-gate | |
| 15:22:24 | cdent | jaypipes: cool, will look asap | |
| 15:22:30 | vdrok | smth like https://review.openstack.org/#/c/487458/1/devstack/settings | |
| 15:24:45 | mriedem | jaypipes: questions in the bottom change | |
| 15:24:59 | dansmith | vdrok: I think what you have will work right? | |
| 15:25:10 | dansmith | vdrok: as long as it gets loaded before the other stuff runs | |
| 15:25:35 | vdrok | dansmith: I think so, yes, it should run before nova | |
| 15:25:39 | mriedem | what he has should work, unless we don't go with that patch and instead go with seans | |
| 15:26:32 | jaypipes | mriedem: answered. | |