Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-11-30
17:52:16 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Remove setting of version/release from releasenotes https://review.openstack.org/520373
17:52:27 jaypipes efried: I can do that. are there any of your changes you haven't pushed?
17:53:10 jaypipes efried: in particular, I'll rebase through 520246, so make sure I don't overwrite any of your work...
17:53:28 efried jaypipes No, but note that I want to break away the stuff above
17:53:41 efried jaypipes Sorry, redo: No, don't rebase that far up.
17:53:52 efried I'm breaking off the subseries starting at uuid_set()
17:53:55 jaypipes efried: where should I go to.
17:53:57 jaypipes ok.
17:54:02 jaypipes no prob. gimme a few minutes
17:54:15 efried So just rebase from https://review.openstack.org/#/c/385693/ (which needs a rebase onto its predecessor too)
17:54:57 efried jaypipes ^
17:55:09 jaypipes ya
18:01:33 cdent efried: left some questions on that bug fix, looks mostly good, but I’m curious about some bits
18:01:48 efried cdent Ack, thanks for the review. Looking...
18:04:10 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Split instance_list into instance and multi_cell https://review.openstack.org/524302
18:07:44 mgagne mriedem: so I reread the placement documentation and it's kind of clear already what you need to do. There are some details which need to be updated such as mention of cellsv1. I will pass through the doc again and see if it's clearer for me now.
18:10:51 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: allow filter providers in tree https://review.openstack.org/377215
18:10:52 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: update client to set parent provider https://review.openstack.org/385693
18:10:52 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: adds REST API for nested providers https://review.openstack.org/384807
18:10:55 jaypipes efried: done
18:11:05 efried jaypipes Cool mon.
18:13:01 openstackgerrit melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Improve the CellDatabases test fixture and usage https://review.openstack.org/508432
18:13:02 openstackgerrit melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: WIP Store a RequestContext on service to reuse for periodic tasks https://review.openstack.org/524306
18:14:42 melwitt mriedem: the test in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/524027 passes with the above ^
18:16:38 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Proper error handling by _ensure_resource_provider https://review.openstack.org/524263
18:16:50 efried cdent Not sure if I addressed your concerns here ^
18:17:23 efried cdent I wouldn't think it necessary to say, "Exceptions raised from here may be caught, logged, or ignored by callers as appropriate"
18:19:11 efried cdent Really just brings things more in line with other methods in SRC, like _update_inventory_attempt which may raise InventoryInUse
18:19:40 melwitt mriedem: *reading the commit message* so your test doesn't always fail though? trying to confirm if the test passing means the issue in my patch was addressed by the latest changes I tried
18:20:04 cdent efried: that wasn’t quite what I meant. You’re obliged, as someone who has introduced a new situation, where exceptions are now raising that weren’t before, to make sure they don’t break other stuff. That can be as simple as identifying the loop where all Exceptions are handled in the scheduler or the resource trackers servers.
18:20:47 efried cdent OIC. Not enough to pass the CI?
18:21:13 cdent We’ve established over and over that CI isn’t covering lots of stuff, especially in the resource tracker
18:21:54 cdent It’s very likely, however, that this _is_ covered, by the kinds of loops that I mention above, but if you don’t say that in your commit message, then reviewers have doubt and we want to minimize that doubt
18:22:08 efried cdent I was being mostly ironical. I'll dig into it. Thanks.
18:26:31 efried cdent AFAICT, it all percolates up to this catch-all, which... ignores it https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/manager.py#L7105
18:27:43 cdent i assumed it would be something like that, and logging and ignoring is what I would expect: it’s a long running process that’s not allowed to die
18:28:13 cdent but if for some reason that was some subclass of Exception, then there would be a chance your new exception would fall through and boom
18:30:53 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Proper error handling by _ensure_resource_provider https://review.openstack.org/524263
18:30:59 efried cdent Added more words ^
18:39:09 mriedem melwitt: it was failing
18:45:44 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Remove workaround for bug #1709118 https://review.openstack.org/524316
18:45:45 openstack bug 1709118 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "_ContextAuthPlugin needs a refresh" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1709118
18:54:35 mriedem dansmith: comments in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/524253/2
18:54:43 mriedem just nits, tests are passing, looks good otherwise
18:57:18 melwitt mriedem: hm, so that points to it being related to the periodic task bug dansmith found in my patch. but the initial write of the compute node record doesn't happen via periodic task, it happens through the pre_start_hook() call in Service. so I'm not sure why fixing the periodic task helps
18:58:30 dansmith mriedem: see my reply real quick
18:58:53 dansmith melwitt: a periodic would create another record in cell0 if it runs
18:59:04 dansmith that was my point
18:59:22 melwitt dansmith: right ... trying to think how that could mess up mriedem's test though, where it got ComputeHostNotFound
18:59:41 melwitt like wouldn't it find the original record that was written via pre_start_hook()
19:00:15 dansmith melwitt: ack, okay, I haven't looked at his thing so I dunno
19:00:20 dansmith just commenting from the sidelines
19:00:56 melwitt ack :)
19:01:29 mriedem dansmith: done
19:02:08 melwitt fixing the periodic task thing (by storing it on Service) made the test pass but why O.o
19:02:30 dansmith mriedem: cool, see the split above it?
19:03:58 mriedem yeah, just haven't reviewed it yet
19:05:24 dansmith gahd dammit
19:05:37 dansmith making changes to a file underneath a rename is annoying :)
19:08:04 mriedem cdent: easy cleanup if you want to respin this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/484667/
19:08:06 mriedem then i'd fast approve
19:08:52 cdent cool, thanks, will get it in a couple minutes, rado’s usually gone by now
19:09:21 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Genericify the instance_list stuff https://review.openstack.org/524253
19:09:22 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Split instance_list into instance and multi_cell https://review.openstack.org/524302
19:10:02 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Create specs directory for Rocky https://review.openstack.org/514101
19:10:31 cfriesen melwitt: do you know if anyone has considered adding a "list all tenants with modified quotas" and "list all users in a tenant with modified quotas" APIs? As it is there's no way to get that information without polling *all* the users/tenants.
19:11:17 melwitt cfriesen: I'm not aware of anyone bringing that up before, no
19:12:11 cfriesen melwitt: I'm looking at kingbird (which replicates quotas in a multi-cloud environment) and they literally have to poll everything.
19:12:38 cfriesen also, it looks like the quota usage (and the "limits" API) doesn't report keypair usage, so they have to manually count them per user.
19:14:57 melwitt I see. ironically when I implemented counting quotas I had to set in_use = 0 for keypairs to keep the same behavior. I was thinking we might have to microversion to change that or otherwise signal it
19:17:01 melwitt so yeah, there are probably many improvements that could happen with the APIs. one thing to consider is that the keystone team is looking to add quota limits to keystone. which would make things separated where you'd have to query keystone for limits and nova for usage
19:22:15 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: Use oslo_db Session in resource_provider.py https://review.openstack.org/523192
19:23:27 jaypipes efried: are you currently working on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/517119/?
19:24:10 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: VMware: Handle concurrent registrations of the VC extension https://review.openstack.org/484667
19:25:30 cdent mriedem: ^ thanks
19:27:01 cfriesen melwitt: do you know what the timeline is on the keystone quotas? If it's going to be a while I might have to propose an API change.
19:27:23 mriedem cdent: thanks - i was coding that in the comment out of memory, does it actualy pass the test?
19:27:31 cdent yes
19:27:35 mriedem cool
19:27:46 efried jaypipes No
19:28:03 cdent and I went to look at the excutils code just to make sure it made sense (because it was new to me) and your example matched the docstring’s example
19:28:10 jaypipes efried: k, I'm going to pull and work on that then
19:28:17 efried jaypipes Cool beans.
19:28:17 melwitt cfriesen: you'll want to ask lbragstad about it as he's in the know about keystone timelines
19:28:45 cdent efried, jaypipes : is there a new stable review-entry point for n-r-p?
19:29:07 jaypipes cdent: unfortunately not.
19:29:14 efried cdent I thought it was here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/377215/
19:29:47 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: allow filter providers in tree https://review.openstack.org/377215
19:29:48 efried cdent The bottom three patches
19:29:48 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: update client to set parent provider https://review.openstack.org/385693
19:29:48 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: adds REST API for nested providers https://review.openstack.org/384807
19:29:54 lbragstad cfriesen: we're in the process of firming up the specification for unified limits https://review.openstack.org/#/c/455709/ (wxy_ is actively responding to comments and making updates)
19:29:59 efried Oh, just updated
19:30:14 jaypipes cdent: I just addressed that microversion.py rebase flub, nothing more.
19:30:22 cdent roger
19:30:29 lbragstad cfriesen: wxy_ also has an early implementation proposed for review
19:30:43 lbragstad cfriesen: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/keystone+branch:master+topic:bp/unified-limits
19:31:02 cdent I think my best plan is perhaps to be done with openstack for today
19:31:30 cdent have fun everyone
19:32:31 lbragstad cfriesen: specification freeze for keystone is next week - so we're trying to get the details ironed out this week and next (all feedback welcome!)

Earlier   Later