| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-12-05 | |||
| 15:19:00 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Add a new check to volume attach https://review.openstack.org/525622 | |
| 15:19:01 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Allow multiple volume attachments https://review.openstack.org/267587 | |
| 15:20:47 | ildikov | mriedem: ^^ | |
| 15:26:32 | mriedem | ack | |
| 15:44:12 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: Add regression test for rebuilding a volume-backed server https://review.openstack.org/525664 | |
| 15:44:13 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: Only query BDMs once in API during rebuild https://review.openstack.org/525665 | |
| 15:44:14 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: Get original image_id from volume for volume-backed instance rebuild https://review.openstack.org/525666 | |
| 15:48:38 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Allow multiple volume attachments https://review.openstack.org/267587 | |
| 15:48:38 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Implement new attach Cinder flow https://review.openstack.org/330285 | |
| 16:01:40 | edleafe | mriedem: time for a question re: alternates for migration? | |
| 16:02:54 | edleafe | if I set return_alternates to True as you suggest, what should then happen to the alternates? | |
| 16:03:23 | mriedem | cold migrate / resize right? | |
| 16:03:47 | edleafe | mriedem: yeah: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/516707/17/nova/conductor/tasks/migrate.py@244 | |
| 16:04:02 | mriedem | well, presumably the same thing as happens when build_and_run_instances gets alternates and sends them to compute, which can send them back to build_instances on a reschedule | |
| 16:04:42 | mriedem | so we have 2 reschedule loops: | |
| 16:05:11 | edleafe | well, I'm unfamiliar with those code pathways, so IYO will that be a major change to those methods? | |
| 16:05:54 | mriedem | 2. superconductor:resize_instance -> compute:prep_resize -> cellconductor:resize_instance | |
| 16:05:54 | mriedem | 1. superconductor:schedule_and_build_instances -> compute:build_and_run_instance -> cellconductor:build_instances | |
| 16:06:07 | mriedem | well, looking at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/511358/29/nova/compute/manager.py | |
| 16:06:18 | mriedem | it looks like it would be a matter of passing host_list to prep_resize in the compute | |
| 16:07:01 | mriedem | and like what you have here in conductor manager (this is cell conductor at this point during a reschedule): | |
| 16:07:04 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/511358/29/nova/conductor/manager.py@517 | |
| 16:07:46 | mriedem | you would have to do the same for the resize reschedule here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/511358/29/nova/conductor/api.py@87 | |
| 16:07:53 | edleafe | ok, next question: should I add that all to the existing patches, or split it into two? | |
| 16:08:01 | mriedem | now, we could arguably do the build and resize + alternates in separate patches | |
| 16:08:05 | mriedem | heh | |
| 16:08:14 | mriedem | split is obviously easier for review | |
| 16:08:20 | mriedem | it would mean 2 compute rpc version bumps | |
| 16:08:29 | mriedem | but service version bumps are free, so i don't think that's a big deal | |
| 16:08:33 | mriedem | dansmith: ^ agree? | |
| 16:09:55 | edleafe | ok, so I'll leave return_alternates=False in the current patch, and then flip it when in a new patch that bumps the compute RPC again. | |
| 16:10:07 | mriedem | makes sense | |
| 16:10:13 | edleafe | ok | |
| 16:11:26 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521662 | |
| 16:11:28 | mriedem | jaypipes: ^ is that cve fix (now disclosed) with the bug link and a release note; melwitt can you also look at ^ | |
| 16:12:40 | melwitt | mriedem: sure | |
| 16:13:09 | dansmith | mriedem: I like to avoid bumps of both rpc and service version when possible, and it usually is.. but yes, they're free | |
| 16:24:28 | bauzas | mriedem: just +2d the cve fix | |
| 16:24:42 | mriedem | bauzas: thanks | |
| 16:24:52 | bauzas | now the bug is disclosed, we can move on | |
| 16:25:13 | bauzas | sorry for having paid a lot of attention for that bug tho, but the overall direction looked good to me a while ago | |
| 16:25:20 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/523214 | |
| 16:25:20 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Add regression test for rebuild with new image doubling allocations https://review.openstack.org/523213 | |
| 16:25:31 | bauzas | ie. using the hints for passing whether it's a rebuild or not | |
| 16:30:04 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/523214 | |
| 16:32:51 | mriedem | sdague: can you hit https://review.openstack.org/#/c/523194/ again? alex had pointed out something so i lost your +2 | |
| 16:46:32 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Refactor the code to check for sufficient hosts https://review.openstack.org/520242 | |
| 16:46:32 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Add Selection objects https://review.openstack.org/499239 | |
| 16:46:33 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Move the to_dict() method to the Selection object https://review.openstack.org/523492 | |
| 16:46:33 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Return Selection objects from the scheduler driver https://review.openstack.org/495854 | |
| 16:46:34 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Change RPC for select_destinations() https://review.openstack.org/516707 | |
| 16:46:34 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Modify select_destinations() to return objects and alts https://review.openstack.org/510159 | |
| 16:46:35 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Make conductor pass and use host_lists https://review.openstack.org/511358 | |
| 16:46:35 | openstackgerrit | Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Move the claim_resources method to scheduler utils https://review.openstack.org/511357 | |
| 16:46:39 | edleafe | mriedem: ^^ addresses your concerns | |
| 16:47:11 | edleafe | mriedem: I'll start on the migrate/resize patch next | |
| 16:47:27 | jaypipes | mriedem: cool, will look shortly, soon as I finish up a rebase of efried_cya_wed's series | |
| 16:48:21 | mriedem | edleafe: ok | |
| 17:11:32 | melwitt | mriedem: now that we're pulling in the dependent os-brick changes, I'm +2 on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/400384 | |
| 17:32:40 | jaypipes | cdent: still around? | |
| 17:32:53 | cdent | yessir, still fighting with this grenade stuff | |
| 17:33:28 | jaypipes | cdent: so I don't believe those comments on the API ref thing on the nested resource providers work are correct... | |
| 17:33:51 | cdent | was just reading your responses, one sec | |
| 17:34:50 | jaypipes | I'm also getting sort of annoyed with this :) | |
| 17:35:04 | cdent | jaypipes: I think the confusion is whether what’s listed at /resource_providers is the full rep or not | |
| 17:35:17 | cdent | and up to now it has been: generation, uuid, name, links | |
| 17:35:37 | cdent | https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/placement/#list-resource-providers | |
| 17:35:43 | jaypipes | no, up until now it's been incorrect. it lists resource_providers (the collective attribute), along with the singular attirbutes | |
| 17:36:06 | cdent | which “it” do you mean? | |
| 17:36:21 | jaypipes | GET /resource_providers response | |
| 17:36:48 | cdent | so you’re saying that for the past 13 microversions what we’ve had at that link above (expand the response example) has been wrong? | |
| 17:37:17 | jaypipes | cdent: I don't see how listing *both* resource_providers (the collective attribute) AND the singular attributes at the same time can be correct. | |
| 17:37:38 | cdent | it’s a list of resource provider objects: | |
| 17:37:45 | jaypipes | yes... | |
| 17:37:49 | jaypipes | and that's all | |
| 17:37:55 | cdent | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/placement/handlers/resource_provider.py#L110 | |
| 17:38:15 | cdent | and the api_ref is set up to list anything, not just the top level things | |
| 17:38:25 | jaypipes | cdent: since when? | |
| 17:38:30 | cdent | since the dawn | |
| 17:38:36 | cdent | we have made expections in the past | |
| 17:38:44 | jaypipes | cdent: why bother having the top-level element at all then? that's just silly IMHO | |
| 17:39:06 | jaypipes | cdent: with no indication of the "level" the attribute is expected to appear at | |
| 17:39:07 | cdent | don’t look at me man, I think the rules on the api-ref are … weird | |
| 17:40:02 | cdent | there has been work done in the nova api-ref (I think?) to indicate path.to.attribute but we’ve not picked it up in placement | |
| 17:41:02 | jaypipes | meh, screw it, I'll just make the damn changes (again, again) | |
| 17:41:28 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make live migration hold resources with a migration allocation https://review.openstack.org/507638 | |
| 17:42:11 | cdent | jaypipes: I think the descending paths thing was worked on near: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/464277/ but I’m not sure if it got anywhere | |
| 17:42:29 | jaypipes | cdent: so is Takashi asking me to put a required: true line in for parent_provider_uuid/root_provider_uuid but only in the response parameter listings? | |
| 17:43:55 | cdent | my read was that he wants the response body to be fully described and the usual way to do that in the case when it is optional is the request body is to inherit the yaml anchor and changed required: false to true | |
| 17:44:34 | cdent | jaypipes: I think it would probably be okay to punt it to a followup (one that perhaps someone else did) | |
| 17:45:09 | jaypipes | cdent: I just don't know what is being asked of me. | |
| 17:45:11 | cdent | jaypipes: the reasons require: true isn’t marked on those guys is because required is the default, isn’t it? | |
| 17:45:45 | cdent | in that case I’d say let’s punt and do it in a followup so it can be looked at separately and more clearly understood | |
| 17:45:57 | jaypipes | cdent: I think he's saying that the *response* always has parent_provider_uuid and therefore the *response* parameter list should have required: true. | |
| 17:46:04 | cdent | my brain is not in that frame right now so can’t tell you something clear and straightforward | |
| 17:46:23 | cdent | effectively yes | |
| 17:47:30 | cdent | I’ve changed my vote for now, in case that helps move things along | |
| 17:49:46 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: allow filter providers in tree https://review.openstack.org/377215 | |
| 17:49:47 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: update client to set parent provider https://review.openstack.org/385693 | |
| 17:49:47 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: adds REST API for nested providers https://review.openstack.org/384807 | |