| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-08-10 | |||
| 13:59:21 | bauzas | sdague: tried to help with defining why we have a force-down flag https://review.openstack.org/#/c/492533/2 | |
| 13:59:35 | bauzas | seeing that being used by operators scares me | |
| 13:59:42 | bauzas | it was never the intent | |
| 14:00:04 | bauzas | and like the bug report mentions, we have the disabling thing | |
| 14:00:10 | ioggstream | hi@all | |
| 14:00:14 | sdague | bauzas: right, so I think we have to be careful about putting too much into api-ref because it's supposed to be a reference | |
| 14:00:25 | sdague | we probably need an HA guide here that explains the whole thing | |
| 14:00:42 | ioggstream | about OS:: Nova::ServerGroup policy, how will anti-affinity (default) policy work if I have more vms than compute nodes? | |
| 14:00:52 | bauzas | sdague: well the problem is that our API can be consumed by both end-users and automation tools | |
| 14:01:13 | sdague | bauzas: I'll be honest, I'm not going to spend all day redrafting this docs patch. I think what I have up there is an improvement, if folks want to take it over and write it instead, I'm good with that | |
| 14:01:13 | mriedem | bauzas: the api-ref could link to a more detailed guide | |
| 14:01:14 | bauzas | sdague: to be frank, I do wonder if we should just cut that flag from the nova CLI | |
| 14:01:20 | mriedem | sdague: there is, or was, a maintenance guide | |
| 14:01:23 | bauzas | sdague: okay, I'll push a rev then | |
| 14:01:25 | mriedem | planned and unplanned | |
| 14:01:29 | sdague | mriedem: sure | |
| 14:01:40 | mriedem | i'd put it in there, but it might have been in the now defunct ops guide | |
| 14:01:46 | bauzas | mriedem: sdague: what are you thinking of just removing that method from our nova CLI ? | |
| 14:01:46 | mriedem | would have to dig | |
| 14:01:56 | bauzas | since only scripts should call it | |
| 14:02:00 | mriedem | meeting time | |
| 14:02:13 | sdague | bauzas: people might have manually downed their nodes as well | |
| 14:02:21 | sdague | bauzas: I think it's fine to be in the nova cli | |
| 14:02:30 | sdague | that's an admin tool | |
| 14:02:38 | sdague | they just need to realize what they are doing | |
| 14:02:43 | bauzas | agreed | |
| 14:02:58 | bauzas | sdague: I'll try a new rev | |
| 14:03:54 | sdague | bauzas: I think your assumption that no one should ever call this manually is wrong | |
| 14:03:58 | jianghuaw | jianghua | |
| 14:04:02 | sdague | the important point is they met preconditions | |
| 14:04:06 | sdague | the service is fenced | |
| 14:04:12 | sdague | we don't care how they met those | |
| 14:04:19 | sdague | but they are expressing to nova that they did | |
| 14:04:24 | bauzas | sdague: we have a service group API for that | |
| 14:04:29 | sdague | it might have been a tool | |
| 14:05:01 | bauzas | sdague: the only usecase I heard of was that the SG API was lacking of functionality and either lagging or totally missing the host being down | |
| 14:05:21 | bauzas | sdague: so, eventually, the SG API would meet those preconds | |
| 14:05:49 | bauzas | that's just because Nova isn't intented to be a Nagios system, we allow other tools to fence the host for us | |
| 14:05:50 | sdague | bauzas: that's not good enough if I need it now | |
| 14:06:03 | bauzas | from our behalf, I mean | |
| 14:06:24 | dtantsur | edleafe: hi! my last attempt to use resource classes in the CI ended up with RamFilter removing the nodes | |
| 14:06:58 | dtantsur | I wonder if I'm missing something.. I thought I disabled requesting RAM/disk/CPU | |
| 14:07:50 | bauzas | dtantsur: Nova by default was still running those filters until yesterday | |
| 14:08:03 | dtantsur | oh | |
| 14:08:18 | edleafe | dtantsur: probably the request was for 1 of the resource class, along with the disk/ram/cpu in the flavor | |
| 14:08:36 | dtantsur | edleafe: I assume I'm removing the request for disk/ram/cpu from flavor | |
| 14:08:39 | dtantsur | lemme get a link | |
| 14:09:06 | dtantsur | edleafe: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/476968/13/devstack/lib/ironic@1889 | |
| 14:09:41 | dtantsur | bauzas: this one, right? https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/2fe96819c24eff5a9493a6559f3e8d5b4624a8c9 | |
| 14:09:42 | edleafe | dtantsur: ok, then that should work | |
| 14:09:58 | bauzas | dtantsur: correct | |
| 14:10:10 | dtantsur | thanks, I'll see how it looks nowadays | |
| 14:10:10 | edleafe | dtantsur: do you have the call to placement anywhere in logs? | |
| 14:10:14 | bauzas | dtantsur: oh wait | |
| 14:10:23 | bauzas | dtantsur: Ironic is special-case IIRC | |
| 14:10:32 | bauzas | dtantsur: you folks have your own czay filters list :) | |
| 14:10:36 | bauzas | crazy | |
| 14:10:43 | bauzas | in nova | |
| 14:10:47 | dtantsur | yeah, we did change something around it.. lemme check | |
| 14:11:11 | dtantsur | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/490459/ | |
| 14:12:07 | dtantsur | this is why I'm seeing the RamFilter, not the ExactRamFilter | |
| 14:12:20 | dtantsur | oh, and by the way. should we kill Exact filters with fire | |
| 14:12:25 | dtantsur | (well, I meant deprecate) | |
| 14:12:27 | dtantsur | ? | |
| 14:13:03 | edleafe | dtantsur: those were there only to support the pretense that an ironic node was a vm | |
| 14:13:11 | edleafe | dtantsur: so yeah, kill 'em! | |
| 14:13:20 | dtantsur | edleafe: wanna get a deprecation patch or should I? | |
| 14:13:45 | edleafe | dtantsur: we should also deprecate the separate ironic filter options, no? | |
| 14:14:05 | dtantsur | edleafe: yep | |
| 14:14:22 | edleafe | dtantsur: I may have time, but not much | |
| 14:14:38 | edleafe | dtantsur: if you want to start and post a WIP, I can pick it up | |
| 14:14:41 | dtantsur | ENOTMUCHTIME is a common error code nowadays | |
| 14:14:44 | dtantsur | sure, will do | |
| 14:20:19 | bauzas | dtantsur: those Exact* filters could just be treated like the other legacy filters | |
| 14:20:32 | dtantsur | and how do you treat legacy filters? :) | |
| 14:20:39 | bauzas | dtantsur: being removed from the list of filters to run by default, but still in tree for upgrade concerns | |
| 14:21:01 | bauzas | when you upgrade from Ocata, you certainly don't want to update nova.conf for that | |
| 14:21:11 | dtantsur | they're not on by default, there is an option to enable them.. | |
| 14:21:30 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: test server evacuation with placement https://review.openstack.org/492548 | |
| 14:22:10 | dtantsur | folks, what's your next version? (to use with deprecated_since) | |
| 14:22:22 | bauzas | well, in theory you could use CachingScheduler with IroncHostManager I guess | |
| 14:22:31 | bauzas | in that case, you'd still require Exact* filters | |
| 14:22:43 | gibi | mriedem: just out of curiosity create a Pike -> Pike evac test and it seems the allocation on the source host has never cleaned up https://review.openstack.org/#/c/492548/ | |
| 14:22:54 | bauzas | yet another call for deprecating the other scheduler driver we have in tree | |
| 14:23:21 | dtantsur | bauzas: I've never heard of people using it, but yeah. For every crazy feature there are people to try it in production.. | |
| 14:23:26 | ioggstream | does anybody knows if soft-anti-affinity may be enabled in newton ? | |
| 14:23:38 | bauzas | ioggstream: IIRC, yes | |
| 14:24:15 | bauzas | ioggstream: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/soft-affinity-for-server-group is Mitaka complete | |
| 14:24:16 | ioggstream | bauzas: by default it doesn't work but I saw that mitaka has an ERRATA | |
| 14:24:17 | mriedem | gibi: because the periodic task doesn't cleanup allocations anymore | |
| 14:24:24 | mriedem | gibi: it assumes the scheduler has everything correct | |
| 14:24:34 | mriedem | and the source node is 'down' | |
| 14:24:35 | gibi | mriedem: but not even the source compute cleans up? | |
| 14:24:46 | gibi | mriedem: after started up again? | |
| 14:24:48 | mriedem | if it's down we probably don't care about it | |
| 14:24:55 | mriedem | oh, we'll talk after the meeting | |
| 14:24:59 | gibi | mriedem: sure | |
| 14:26:15 | mriedem | but yeah the update_available_resource code in pike now does'nt overwrite the allocatoins | |
| 14:26:17 | mriedem | per that change | |
| 14:26:25 | mriedem | so that's why the source compute won't cleanup once it comes back up | |