Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-12-07
19:02:34 efried dansmith Well, we caught a grenade bug (it went "boom") with the last one.
19:03:35 efried dansmith It's not that we *couldn't* catch the errors without raising; it's that we *don't*. We're not paying attention to the returns from these methods in many cases, so the errors slide on by without anyone noticing.
19:04:13 dansmith well, in some cases that's intentional, where we get allocations and if none, then do a thing
19:04:26 dansmith just saying all those places will need to be changed. I'll reserve judgment until I see them I guess
19:06:18 efried dansmith Roger wilco. I think the important ones are where the caller doesn't necessarily have to do anything with the return value from the method - just invoking for the side effect. Methods like get_allocation_candidates don't fit that, so I guess it makes sense to leave 'em alone.
19:09:48 dansmith I just hadn't thought much about it so seeing them all will help
19:11:18 efried dansmith With that discussion, it's actually going to be pretty limited. So thanks for that.
19:29:31 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Object changes to support last-modified headers https://review.openstack.org/521639
19:29:32 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Add info about last-modified to contrib docs https://review.openstack.org/526084
19:29:32 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Add cache headers to placement api requests https://review.openstack.org/521640
19:38:55 jaypipes dansmith, mriedem: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/385693/ should be ready to go.
19:39:43 mriedem it's placement
19:39:45 mriedem i'll tell you now
19:40:06 jaypipes :(
19:40:10 mriedem jaypipes: i'll trade you that for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/525787/
19:40:42 dansmith I dunno what jaypipes' is, but it's not an even trade
19:40:52 jaypipes mriedem: sure, deal.
19:41:45 mriedem dansmith: is that a slight against mine or his?
19:41:56 dansmith mriedem: yours :)
19:42:01 mriedem ha
19:42:11 mriedem everyone loves some good block device'n
19:42:14 efried dansmith Yeah, don't take the trade. jaypipes' is easy.
19:42:44 dansmith I clicked on mriedem's link to see if it was one of my reviews he just just finished and was looking for a +W
19:42:49 dansmith but alas, no
19:43:00 jaypipes efried: not *just* BDM. BFV + BDM, otherwise known as BDSM.
19:43:05 dansmith haha
19:43:12 mriedem dansmith: you can get this easy refactor to complete the set https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526182/
19:43:52 dansmith mriedem: I'll trade you for revisiting my live migration allocations one
19:44:12 dansmith that will even out your karma for trading jay something easy for something hard
19:44:33 mriedem fwiw, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/385693/ has a problem in the commit message
19:46:05 efried mriedem Will y'all fast-approve if I make that edit? Hate to lose gibi's +2
19:46:19 mriedem i'm still reviewing
19:46:24 mriedem there are other....concerns
19:46:28 efried ight
19:46:34 mriedem the ... is for intended dramatic effect
19:46:46 efried jaypipes FYI I have this series locally, with lots of deltas, so *please* don't re-publish.
19:46:55 jaypipes efried: roger
19:50:20 mriedem efried: jaypipes: replied https://review.openstack.org/#/c/385693/
19:50:22 mriedem pick your poison
19:51:07 mriedem it's probably premature to say in a release note what our minimum required version of placement is at this point
19:51:08 efried mriedem Nice. But FYI, I believe that ship already sailed.
19:51:11 mriedem since that's likely to change
19:51:28 efried That's what we discovered with that grenade bug.
19:51:46 mriedem so we currently say we require 1.10
19:51:54 mriedem what do we actually require?
19:52:01 mriedem or were we just using 1.10?
19:52:02 efried Yuh, that's a lie at this point. I believe it's 1.14.
19:52:10 mriedem yes, ^ requires 1.14
19:52:12 mriedem my point is,
19:52:24 mriedem was anything in nova before this change using something higher than 1.10?
19:52:29 mriedem because if not, grenade was doing it's job
19:52:30 efried Oh, I thought it was the patch before that one. Never mind, you're right.
19:52:59 efried Does that mean cdent's change was incorrect?
19:53:01 mriedem we are essentially side stepping any form of version discovery still with placement and doing the ironic thing and saying you just have to have external services upgraded first, period
19:53:13 mriedem not necessarily,
19:53:21 mriedem we'll need grenade upgrading things for us to have sane CI
19:53:32 mriedem e.g. queens nova doesn't test against pike cinder
19:54:11 efried mriedem So what are our actual options here, since we don't yet know what the minimum microversion will be? We create the reno with 1.14 and just remember to bump it with each patch that uses something higher?
19:54:16 mriedem i think my point is just we aren't doing a good job about being careful with versions
19:54:34 mriedem unlike we do with other external services
19:54:57 mriedem regarding a release note, i said i think that's premature right now
19:55:04 mriedem since it's likely to bump again before we release queens
19:55:15 mriedem so https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/cmd/status.py#L202 needs to change in a follow up
19:55:26 mriedem and we should start working on Queens notes for https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/user/placement.html#upgrade-notes, in a follow up
19:55:28 mriedem agreed?
19:55:42 jaypipes works for me.
19:55:43 cdent that sounds right
19:56:30 mriedem ok, +W the
19:56:31 mriedem *then
19:56:33 cdent i agree we’ve not been careful about versions, but I’m not sure it is a huge problem in reality
19:56:40 melwitt mriedem: FYI I added some test coverage here and stacked the remove old quotas code follow up on top https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526270
20:00:56 mriedem melwitt: comments inline
20:02:46 jaypipes mriedem: reviewed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/525787/. +Wd
20:03:18 melwitt mriedem: I didn't have access to self.flags in fixtures.py, I assumed it's on the base TestCase class. but let me check
20:04:22 mriedem melwitt: you likely have to pass the test's self into the fixture
20:04:27 mriedem like we do in some other fixtures
20:04:37 mriedem i care less about the self.flags thing
20:04:46 mriedem and more about doing the cleanup after the thing you change, and removing the unused CONF in the sample test
20:04:54 melwitt oh, got it. I can do that then
20:05:04 mriedem jaypipes: thanks, replied about the setup thing
20:05:11 melwitt k
20:08:09 mriedem jaypipes: btw, i haven't dealt with that much mox in a long time...
20:08:29 mriedem the strictness with which mox makes sure you hit bdm.save() cost me about 2 hours
20:08:58 jaypipes mriedem: I know, right? :)
20:09:54 cdent good night
20:12:56 mriedem jaypipes: efried: want me to do the doc and nova-status stuff from https://review.openstack.org/#/c/385693/ ?
20:13:25 efried mriedem I would welcome that. Were you planning to do it in isolation or add it somewhere in this series?
20:13:31 mriedem isolation
20:13:35 mriedem i'm not touching that mess
20:13:36 efried Perfect
20:13:39 efried Yeah, you shouldn't.
20:19:13 melwitt I don't know why but using self.flags causes the concurrent test fail for the NoopQuotaDriver
20:19:36 mriedem huh, maybe not global enough?
20:23:41 melwitt oh because self.flags doesn't clear the conf override. weird, I thought it would have to so it works with multiple tests
20:24:29 efried melwitt I have a bug for that.
20:24:30 efried Stand by...
20:24:47 james_li_ Hi nova devs, a quick question: is it possible to attach a volume of another tenant to my server?
20:25:24 mriedem james_li_: depends on the policy configuration, but not by default
20:25:25 melwitt gah, what other channel did I accidentally leave by pressing ctrl-w in the wrong window
20:25:47 efried melwitt Sorry, different bug, probably not related: https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.config/+bug/1709728

Earlier   Later