| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-11-27 | |||
| 18:29:43 | dansmith | okay but wouldn't you rather a change that doesn't need a new config option and _is_ upstream? | |
| 18:30:12 | belmoreira | I started this conversation because I'm not sure if we are missing something else | |
| 18:30:37 | belmoreira | or this can have any consequence when upgrading then to ocata/pike | |
| 18:31:45 | belmoreira | dansmith sure I would prefer a proper fix | |
| 18:35:37 | belmoreira | dansmith thanks. I will have a look on how to have it in cells/messaging | |
| 18:36:19 | dansmith | belmoreira: | |
| 18:36:24 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Fix cellsv1 build request deletion if multiple api databases are used https://review.openstack.org/523187 | |
| 18:36:38 | dansmith | belmoreira: see if that ^ works and/or tweak until it does and then we can move on with it | |
| 18:37:46 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Fix cellsv1 build request deletion if multiple api databases are used https://review.openstack.org/523187 | |
| 18:40:07 | belmoreira | dansmith: thanks a lot. I will let you know | |
| 18:40:25 | dansmith | belmoreira: cool | |
| 18:50:36 | artom | mriedem, haven't had a chance to look at the latest version yet | |
| 18:50:41 | artom | Will do that now | |
| 18:54:57 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: Use oslo_db Session in resource_provider.py https://review.openstack.org/523192 | |
| 18:54:59 | jaypipes | mriedem, efried_rollin: ^ | |
| 18:58:24 | mriedem | that is a large change, but looks like it's inevitable | |
| 18:59:54 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix 'force' parameter in os-quota-sets PUT schema https://review.openstack.org/523194 | |
| 19:00:00 | mriedem | sdague: ^ is that 1 line os-quota-sets 'force' regression fix. the functional api samples are just to show the regression | |
| 19:05:51 | artom | Ohhh, the "need to open every PS individually to leave comments on each" thing is gone! | |
| 19:06:04 | artom | Man, my life just keeps on improving | |
| 19:06:09 | artom | This morning I learned about pssh | |
| 19:06:52 | jaypipes | mriedem: well, I figured it would be silly to fix only the conn.execute() calls in the lookup_entry_in_table() function and leave the other call locations. | |
| 19:08:08 | mriedem | jaypipes: if we need to backport that fix, then it would be best to fix the one place and do the massive refactor on top | |
| 19:08:44 | jaypipes | mriedem: there's latent bugs in all those other call locations. | |
| 19:09:18 | jaypipes | mriedem: you want to backport >1 patch or just one? | |
| 19:09:37 | jaypipes | mriedem: also, I'm happy to create a backport patch for pike/ocata | |
| 19:10:17 | mriedem | i single backport patch would be ideal, however, with the amount of refactoring that's gone on already in queens, the backport is probably going to suck, but if you want to own the backport then that's ok with me for a single change | |
| 19:10:58 | mriedem | i don't know that it needs to go to ocata | |
| 19:11:13 | mriedem | i think this actually crept up in CI because posting allocations during scheduling failed | |
| 19:11:15 | mriedem | which wasn't in ocata | |
| 19:12:15 | jaypipes | mriedem: I'll handle the backport to pike, then, no prob. | |
| 19:13:22 | sdague | mriedem: +2, though I'm still rather down on all the deepcopy and modify pattern, I think it creates more of these bugs in the future | |
| 19:13:35 | sdague | vs. just do a full expand every time there is a new tweak on the schema | |
| 19:22:23 | mriedem | sdague: thanks | |
| 19:22:27 | mriedem | dansmith: here is my proposed reno https://gist.github.com/mriedem/3da0a2edf18be0487e8becad31293077 | |
| 19:22:36 | mriedem | for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521186/ | |
| 19:22:44 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: finish refactor AllocCandidates._get_by_filters() https://review.openstack.org/516782 | |
| 19:23:04 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: required traits for no sharing providers https://review.openstack.org/517027 | |
| 19:23:20 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Add ProviderSummary.resource_class_names @property https://review.openstack.org/517646 | |
| 19:31:23 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add regression test for rebuild with new image doubling allocations https://review.openstack.org/521153 | |
| 19:31:23 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Refined fix for validating image on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521186 | |
| 19:31:24 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521662 | |
| 19:31:37 | mriedem | jaypipes: i added a reno on https://review.openstack.org/521186 which you were +2 on | |
| 19:33:43 | cfriesen | when updating the default quota class set, if I set a value lower than the current usage will that prevent any more resources from being consumed? updating quota-sets has the "force" option for this case, but I don't see that for quota class sets. | |
| 19:36:51 | mriedem | cfriesen: quota classes aren't tied to a tenant | |
| 19:37:00 | mriedem | so there is no 'current usage' on a quota class | |
| 19:37:38 | mriedem | as for "if I set a value lower than the current usage will that prevent any more resources from being consumed" - i'm not sure | |
| 19:37:54 | mriedem | it might | |
| 19:38:00 | cfriesen | mriedem: I was envisioning usage as being basically per tenant. | |
| 19:38:33 | mriedem | we check limits based on (1) is there a specific limit for this project, (2) if not, is there a specific limit for this quota class, (3) if not, what's the configured limit | |
| 19:38:37 | cfriesen | so you have the class default as 10, the tenant currently has 9, I change the class default to 8 | |
| 19:39:06 | mriedem | i think that will cause the next instance create to be overquota | |
| 19:39:27 | cfriesen | that matches my understanding, thanks. it's odd we have "force" for that when setting tenant quotas but not the global default | |
| 19:39:34 | mriedem | the point in changing the limits to be below the usage (like the force parameter in PUT /os-quota-sets) is to get to the desired limit regardless of current usage | |
| 19:40:01 | mriedem | if we checked that on the global default, we'd have to check usage for all projects | |
| 19:40:10 | mriedem | and, | |
| 19:40:26 | mriedem | we could be tracking quota for projects that no longer actually exist in keystone | |
| 19:40:35 | cfriesen | true enough | |
| 19:40:54 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Implement query param schema for delete assisted vol https://review.openstack.org/513668 | |
| 19:41:07 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Versioned notifications for service create and delete https://review.openstack.org/519588 | |
| 20:08:58 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Add regression test for rebuild with new image doubling allocations https://review.openstack.org/523213 | |
| 20:08:58 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Refined fix for validating image on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/523212 | |
| 20:08:59 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/523214 | |
| 20:15:25 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: PowerVM Driver: SEA https://review.openstack.org/523216 | |
| 20:19:37 | cfriesen | mriedem: when querying quota details including usage for a tenant/user, does it only count resources created by that user? | |
| 20:20:42 | mriedem | cfriesen: you should talk to melwitt | |
| 20:27:39 | mriedem | cfriesen: in general quotas are on the usage in the project, | |
| 20:27:41 | mriedem | except for keypairs | |
| 20:28:25 | mriedem | you can see how usage is counted by the methods called for each CountableResource here https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/quota.py#L1903 | |
| 20:28:58 | cfriesen | mriedem: thanks | |
| 20:30:35 | mriedem | so i guess PUT /os-quota-sets/{tenant_id} is a bit weird if you're updating limits for keypairs, since those are per-user, so that should really be something like PUT /os-qouta-sets/{tenant_id}/key_pairs/{user_id} - or something like that | |
| 20:32:24 | cfriesen | quotas in general is a mess. the mapping between the HTTP API and the internal representation is really indirect. Looking at the quota for a user/tenant, it takes multiple queries to figure if the limit came from a tenant/user quota, a tenant quota, the default quota class, or the default in the code or config file. | |
| 20:34:38 | artom | mriedem, dansmith, I think we may have gotten a filter wrong, but I could just be being an idiot. Review left. | |
| 20:35:34 | mriedem | cfriesen: that's what i explained before | |
| 20:35:59 | mriedem | cfriesen: and why i wrote https://review.openstack.org/#/c/411035/ | |
| 20:47:46 | mriedem | artom: so just AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation at this point | |
| 20:47:47 | mriedem | ? | |
| 20:48:07 | artom | mriedem, yeah. Am I correct in wondering why it's True? | |
| 20:48:20 | mriedem | yeah i think that's a carry over from PS5 when it used to be called POLICY_FILTER | |
| 20:48:24 | mriedem | and got lumped in as 'policy' | |
| 20:48:35 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521186/5..7/nova/scheduler/filters/aggregate_multitenancy_isolation.py | |
| 20:49:12 | artom | Cool, so I'm not in the field | |
| 20:50:54 | mriedem | ok so i think i'll just change that one unless dansmith objects | |
| 20:51:09 | dansmith | I'm sure I don't | |
| 20:52:10 | artom | dansmith is like this pigeon at this point: https://imgur.com/gallery/Y5Ps3 | |
| 20:52:37 | dansmith | pretty much | |
| 20:53:01 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Refined fix for validating image on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521186 | |
| 20:53:02 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521662 | |
| 20:53:02 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add regression test for rebuild with new image doubling allocations https://review.openstack.org/521153 | |
| 20:53:52 | mriedem | artom: are you happy now? | |
| 20:56:09 | artom | mriedem, sorry what? I've gone and joined dansmith and the pigeon on the dog: https://i.imgur.com/ijgWRzw.jpg | |
| 20:56:19 | artom | mriedem, in seriousness though, yes. Thanks for being patient :) | |
| 20:57:16 | mriedem | approved, thanks for being thorough | |
| 20:57:41 | mriedem | just like henry david | |
| 20:57:52 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/522929 | |
| 20:58:39 | artom | Oh and this means I get to do all those downstream CVE backports I signed for | |
| 20:59:11 | artom | So, actually, I have another nit I'd like to bikeshed over for the entire week | |
| 21:15:39 | openstackgerrit | Claudiu Belu proposed openstack/nova master: POC: tests: autospecs all the mock.patch usages https://review.openstack.org/470775 | |
| 21:17:19 | claudiub|2 | mriedem: hi. if you're still interested about mock autospecing, the above patch enforces autospec on all mock.patch calls. it does have a few hacks though, if you're willing to accept the compromise. | |
| 21:23:44 | belmoreira | dansmith: was testing what you proposed. I though I had a good solution... now I feel embarrassed :) | |