Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-08-10
17:30:34 efried sdague Okay that stack failed, on image create.
17:31:29 efried apache error log shows an ENOSPC in /tmp. I've got .8GB in there; is it really trying to copy the image through /tmp??
17:40:53 sdague efried: it might be
17:41:03 efried sdague Restacking, gonna watch /tmp...
17:41:04 sdague mtreinish: ^^^
17:41:14 sdague it might be specific on the uwsgi glance
17:41:25 sdague and, if so, that could be an interesting issue
17:42:30 sdague you all are booting a real image, not a cirros, right?
17:42:44 sdague I could totally imagine that issue to have slipped through because cirros
17:43:33 cdent excellent point, sdague, at least one interation of the uwsgiification of glance needed to do some writes to disk, but I don’t know if that version landed, and if it did where on disk
17:44:36 efried sdague Yeah, it's a real image - though it's pretty small (2GB)
17:45:04 sdague efried: yeh... but there was all manner of tricksyness to get uwsgi glance to work
17:45:23 sdague and I can totally imagine full write of the upload to tmp was part of that
17:45:29 efried How... precious.
17:49:22 mriedem melwitt: hmm, nova-network only starts in a cells v1 config
17:49:31 mriedem so yeah, i don't think we probably have to worry about that for cells v2 multi-cell
17:56:26 efried sdague Yup, thar she blows. During that image create command, /tmp fills quickly, then stack bails.
17:57:18 mriedem dude
17:57:20 mriedem thar she blars
17:58:01 mriedem bauzas: jaypipes: we want this in for pike too https://review.openstack.org/#/c/492234/
17:58:20 mriedem melwitt: ^
17:58:51 jaypipes mriedem: done
17:59:43 mriedem thanks
18:00:03 SamYaple any chance I will see this backport merge https://review.openstack.org/#/c/486272/ ? im not sure what novas backport policies are
18:00:05 mriedem melwitt: can you also help go through the set of docs changes leading up to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/491853/ ? that's the target for the docs migration for rc1
18:01:27 mriedem SamYaple: maybe
18:01:38 mriedem there should be a push for stable branch reviews once we are clear of pike rc1
18:03:22 SamYaple mriedem: ok thanks. i can't run ocata in my setup without this patch and im not a huge fan of carrying patches which im currently doing with it
18:03:38 sdague SamYaple: +2 on that.
18:04:15 SamYaple nice sdague! thanks
18:04:36 mtreinish sdague, cdent: we ended up doing mod_proxy with http traffic on a local port
18:04:57 sdague mtreinish: yeh, file upload seems to create a full temp file though
18:04:57 mtreinish glance runs uwsgi in http mode and apache just forwards the traffic to the local uwsgi daemon
18:05:10 sdague which, is actually kind of an issue
18:05:28 cdent yeah, that will be because of a tweak to mod proxy’s behavior
18:05:29 sdague from nova bugs, 120GB snapshots are a thing
18:05:51 sdague no one is planning N * 120GB free in /tmp
18:08:04 cdent I guess that means the question becomes: is anyone planning to duplicate devstack’s way of running glance?
18:08:09 mtreinish sdague: I'm not sure how the uwsgi change would effect things there. We ran basically the same config before just instead of uwsgi running glance it was glance standalone. The apache config was more or less the same for tls
18:08:21 mtreinish unless uwsgi is using /tmp as a cache
18:08:26 cdent it’s mod proxy
18:08:43 sdague cdent: that's an impact of the tls termination?
18:09:33 efried mtreinish Is there a uwsgi config somewhere that I can tell to use something other than /tmp ?
18:10:04 efried I'm trying again with TMPDIR=/var/tmp (where I have some more space) - but that'll only affect stuff running directly under the auspices of stack.sh
18:11:11 efried mm, unless I set it in /etc/environment. Let's see if that flies...
18:11:50 cdent sdague, mtreinish, efried : https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_proxy.html#request-bodies
18:11:57 cdent it’s the sendcl thing
18:12:16 cdent that was added to the proxy config when glance switched to uwsg
18:12:45 mtreinish cdent: the mod_proxy config for glance should not be using sendcl
18:12:58 cdent did you take it back out?
18:13:08 mtreinish that was one of the paths I was investigating and it didn't work for various reasons (including this issue growing tmp space)
18:13:52 melwitt mriedem: sure thing
18:14:10 mtreinish cdent: https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/blob/master/lib/apache#L333 is the path for glance
18:14:11 cdent it’s currently on line 276 of lib/apache
18:14:32 mtreinish cdent: right that's the path that's not glance
18:14:42 cdent is setenv iglobal to apache ?
18:15:31 cdent It looks like it may be
18:16:33 sdague so... if you hit uwsgi directly without the tls proxy, this wouldn't be an issue?
18:17:12 cdent sdague: unclear, because it may be the mod_proxy_uwsgi also attends to it?
18:18:12 cdent I’m not certain this is the problem, but I do think sendcl is a factor, or something like it
18:18:22 cdent hard to be clear what uwsgi does in the face of file uploads
18:18:32 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Imported Translations from Zanata https://review.openstack.org/477091
18:18:43 sdague yeh, it's supposed to be chunk encoded upload
18:18:58 sdague but bouncing through proxies... things get tricky
18:19:43 mtreinish is there a running system with this issue? because it's easy to confirm if apache is passing chunked data to uwsgi with a tcpump on the local port
18:19:47 cdent if you are sending chunked but demanding content-lenght (from whatever directive) a write will be required
18:20:20 mriedem sdague: i've got a couple of comments in here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/491815
18:20:21 mtreinish cdent: if setenv is globally scoped across different site files we probaly just need to create a virtualhost for the glance path to isolate it from the other sites
18:20:59 mriedem melwitt: take a look at my comments if you update
18:21:10 mtreinish cdent: fwiw, the glance path doesn't use mod_proxy_uwsgi
18:21:35 cdent I know, but it does use mod_proxy doesn’t it? At least that’s what I thought I heard you say?
18:21:43 mtreinish yes it does
18:21:46 melwitt mriedem: phew, in the nick of time
18:22:27 melwitt looks like sdague is on it already
18:22:41 sdague mriedem: ok, so an inline change to that is going to be 4 - 6 hours to get check results back
18:22:54 sdague how late you staying up for the branch?
18:22:59 sdague vs. fix later
18:23:38 mriedem it's just docs, shouldn't run all jobs
18:23:44 sdague it doesn't
18:23:50 sdague the check queue is starved out
18:23:59 melwitt hm, yeah I didn't think about going through the check queue again. though I thought it would be fast for docs
18:24:01 sdague it's hours before you get a slot
18:24:20 mriedem are you already doing a dump of review comment follow up stuff at the end of the series?
18:24:30 mriedem like https://review.openstack.org/#/c/491517/
18:24:47 sdague I rebased that and stuck it on the end
18:25:01 sdague as it was in merge conflict, and I didn't want to generate more conflicts
18:25:03 mriedem alright i'm fine with following up at the end of the series
18:25:10 sdague ok, can do
18:25:19 mriedem melwitt: you want the +W ?
18:25:33 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Add format_dom for PCI device addresses https://review.openstack.org/491822
18:25:55 melwitt mriedem: hell yes I do
18:26:00 sdague I also tried to set expectations here - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/492124 how we really do need to think about docs reviews a bit differently than code reviews, especially because they are merge magnets
18:27:04 sdague yeh, it looks like we're at 3.5 hours hold to get check nodes
18:27:23 cdent mtreinish: you added the sendcl, do you remember why? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459451/
18:27:42 cdent it looks like maybe you accidentally left it in
18:27:42 melwitt +Warthogged
18:27:54 sdague melwitt: thanks
18:27:54 cdent after choosing a different approach
18:28:16 sdague ok, I'll work on follow up fix patch at top of stack
18:28:53 mtreinish cdent: my intent there was specifically for the non-glance case. If nova or others gets a chunked request we don't want it to blow up an invalid content length error

Earlier   Later