| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-01-18 | |||
| 12:26:16 | bhujay | lyarwood: But if we use boot from a image which is there in glance with glance backend as ceph will the instance OS ephemeral be placed on FC array by nova ? | |
| 12:28:06 | lyarwood | bhujay: yeah, create the volume from the image with `cinder create --image $UUID $SIZE ; cinder set-bootable $VOLUME_ID true` and then boot from it with `nova boot --boot-volume $VOLUME_ID [..] etc` | |
| 12:28:28 | lyarwood | bhujay: cinder copies the image into a volume with the above | |
| 12:28:44 | lyarwood | bhujay: but if you're already using rbd I don't see why you need the FC array :) | |
| 12:30:57 | openstackgerrit | Ameed Ashour proposed openstack/nova master: change instance_system_metadata column type https://review.openstack.org/526900 | |
| 12:31:58 | bhujay | lyarwood: Three reasons , one is urgent . I have run out of rbd space and i have huge capacity free from SAN , High performance for some load and in the long run I am going to have a multi network zone compute node with firewall so IP based storage will not work | |
| 12:37:24 | bhujay | lyarwood: Can you please see this link . what does this document mean https://docs.openstack.org/ocata/config-reference/compute/fibre-channel.html will it lead to nova placing the ephemeral volumes or boot from array directly without cinder ? | |
| 12:39:02 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: [placement] Fix resource provider delete https://review.openstack.org/529519 | |
| 12:54:04 | Spazmotic | If anyone has XenAPI Driver knowledge please feel free to take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/533168/, would appreciate your review or words of advice. Will be AFK for a while but tag me and i'll get bakc to ya :) | |
| 12:55:30 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/os-vif master: Fix VF-rep lookup routine to use parent PF number https://review.openstack.org/531674 | |
| 13:03:07 | jaypipes | ameeda: good morning sir. I will look at your patch in a little bit. just note, however, your patch is lower on the priority queue than efried's patch series on resource provider trees, which I will be focusing on this morning. | |
| 13:03:37 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Handle swapping to a multiattach volume https://review.openstack.org/532928 | |
| 13:03:37 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: [libvirt] Allow multiple volume attachments https://review.openstack.org/267587 | |
| 13:03:38 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: [api] Allow multi-attach in compute api https://review.openstack.org/271047 | |
| 13:03:38 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Pass multiattach flag to reserve_block_device_name https://review.openstack.org/531244 | |
| 13:03:39 | openstackgerrit | Ildiko Vancsa proposed openstack/nova master: Add the nova-multiattach experimental queue job https://review.openstack.org/532689 | |
| 13:04:13 | lyarwood | bhujay: sorry, no, it doesn't | |
| 13:04:26 | ildikov | bauzas: thanks for reviewing the chain | |
| 13:04:56 | lyarwood | mdbooth: so I burned most of the morning getting a multi-node rbd ceph env created to test the migration flows | |
| 13:05:11 | lyarwood | mdbooth: if you had any cycles this afternoon and still wanted to take a look at the LUKS tests then please by all means do | |
| 13:05:12 | ildikov | bauzas: I had to rebase it, so I lost the +A on the bottom two patches | |
| 13:05:44 | mdbooth | lyarwood: Ok, will do. Won't be for a couple of hours, though. | |
| 13:06:25 | bhujay | lyarwood: Thanks for all the clarifications , this will save me a lot of time . I will follow your suggestion to use it through cinder | |
| 13:12:08 | bauzas | ildikov: ack, will look again | |
| 13:13:16 | bauzas | ildikov: +Wd | |
| 13:13:22 | bauzas | looking at the 3rd in the series | |
| 13:13:36 | ildikov | bauzas: thank you!!! | |
| 13:14:27 | efried | jaypipes Is there a plan in the future to implement any kind of allocation healing/discovery, whereby we try to validate allocations in the placement db against the VMs nova actually has deployed? | |
| 13:14:58 | jaypipes | efried: no plan, no | |
| 13:15:03 | efried | thx | |
| 13:15:16 | bauzas | efried: WDYM ? | |
| 13:15:19 | bauzas | self-healing ? | |
| 13:15:36 | bauzas | that should be done by computes, nope ? | |
| 13:15:40 | efried | bauzas Yeah, basically anything to make sure the placement DB is in fact in sync with what's going on IRL | |
| 13:15:42 | efried | bauzas No | |
| 13:15:55 | efried | bauzas The computes get to report info to sync the *inventory* | |
| 13:16:00 | efried | bauzas Not the *allocations* | |
| 13:16:19 | bauzas | efried: but the compute nodes know if the instances are good or not | |
| 13:16:52 | efried | bauzas But other than e.g. removing allocations for destroyed instances, they don't sync up the placement DB. | |
| 13:17:05 | efried | bauzas If what you're saying is that the two "should" never get out of sync... | |
| 13:17:16 | efried | bauzas ...that may be what we're banking on :) | |
| 13:17:43 | bauzas | efried: so, if it wouldn't be the compute service which would look at all the instances, which service should be doing that ? | |
| 13:18:03 | efried | mdbooth At least enough to open the bug | |
| 13:18:08 | ameeda | jaypipes: thank you sir, I understand that :) | |
| 13:18:12 | efried | mdbooth A new bug, that is | |
| 13:18:25 | mdbooth | efried: Yep | |
| 13:18:26 | efried | bauzas No, I agree it should be the compute service. | |
| 13:18:40 | efried | bauzas Point is, we have no plans for the compute service to do that. | |
| 13:19:03 | bauzas | anyway, let's discuss that in the PTG | |
| 13:19:08 | efried | bauzas (That said, the compute service is only responsible for the resource providers it's responsible for.) | |
| 13:19:34 | bauzas | efried: yup, and I agree with what you just said | |
| 13:19:44 | efried | Others, e.g. the ones controlled by neutron or a shared provider manager... | |
| 13:19:56 | efried | And when there's supposed to be coordination between/among such sources... | |
| 13:19:58 | bauzas | efried: if the self-healing is done by the compute service, then that service would only heal the related instances it has | |
| 13:20:01 | efried | I can see where stuff could get out of sync. | |
| 13:20:12 | efried | Though here's an interesting case: | |
| 13:20:24 | bauzas | efried: I'm not against that, I mean, only Neutron would know which ports are fine | |
| 13:20:34 | bauzas | or which routers are there | |
| 13:21:39 | efried | If I have some allocations, and then I go and change my allocation ratio, and then I delete some allocations, I assume they get deleted as multiplied by the *new* allocation ratio, which would certainly lead to the db being out of sync. jaypipes am I missing something here? | |
| 13:22:24 | jaypipes | efried: yes, you are missing the fact that when you delete an allocation, there's nothing to do with the allocation ratio of the inventory. | |
| 13:22:50 | efried | I'll think it through again some time when there aren't more important things going on :) | |
| 13:23:00 | jaypipes | efried: allocation ratio is only used as a constraint at claim time. | |
| 13:23:23 | jaypipes | efried: so if you change it, it will affect claim decisions in the future after the change | |
| 13:23:32 | jaypipes | efried: but will have no effect on existing allocations | |
| 13:23:47 | efried | ack | |
| 13:24:02 | jaypipes | heh | |
| 13:24:41 | jaypipes | efried: if you could get rid of this flu for me, that would be appreciate too :( still going after 11 days :( | |
| 13:24:56 | efried | aw dude, that sucks. | |
| 13:25:14 | efried | You think you've got it rough, it's 26 degrees here. | |
| 13:25:22 | bauzas | jaypipes: seriously ? | |
| 13:25:29 | bauzas | man, change your doctor | |
| 13:25:39 | efried | Yeah, get you some Tamiflu | |
| 13:25:59 | bauzas | 26 degrees is excellent by a winter time, here | |
| 13:26:14 | bauzas | of course, it's just not the same degrees that you folks :p | |
| 13:26:19 | bauzas | than* | |
| 13:26:38 | jaypipes | efried: it's only 36 degrees here :( | |
| 13:26:47 | efried | Unacceptable. | |
| 13:26:56 | efried | Anything below 45 makes me grouchy. | |
| 13:27:01 | jaypipes | indeed. | |
| 13:27:07 | jaypipes | grrrroaaarrr. | |
| 13:46:24 | Spazmotic | Flu is spreading out the workplace like a wildfire.. I am going to Korea in 2 weeks so have been working from home to isolate myself. | |
| 13:47:54 | efried | FYI, added nova to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PTG/Rocky/Etherpads | |
| 13:49:04 | jaypipes | efried: hold off responding to my review comments for at least half an hour. | |
| 13:49:15 | efried | jaypipes That bad? | |
| 13:49:26 | efried | or because you're queueing up other stuff? | |
| 13:49:27 | jaypipes | efried: I'm saving my comments on higher patches as I go along while doing a Reply comment on the bottom patch ... | |
| 13:49:34 | efried | gotcha. | |
| 13:50:15 | jaypipes | efried: doing it this way because otherwise I will end up with about 50 patchsets with draft review comments all just sitting around and not saved... | |
| 13:50:28 | efried | I dig it | |
| 13:50:35 | jaypipes | you speak jive? | |
| 13:51:00 | jaypipes | Jive ass dude don't got no brains anyhow. | |
| 13:51:09 | jaypipes | ok, back to my review... | |
| 13:51:18 | jaypipes | enough airplane! for one day | |
| 13:51:43 | Spazmotic | I need to find a new bug to fix while I wait on this one.. going stircrazy. I really need to bust out of stupid xenapi | |
| 13:52:52 | jaypipes | Spazmotic: efried can point you at a whole list of placement bugs we could use help on :) | |
| 13:53:23 | Spazmotic | Haha i'm not super good at.. things. I'm not sure how much of the insanity I see him commit that I could keep up with :D | |
| 13:53:35 | efried | Wow | |
| 13:54:07 | efried | Spazmotic If you're so inclined: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=placement | |
| 13:54:08 | jaypipes | hehe | |
| 13:54:13 | Spazmotic | Yeah sure i'll definately take a look | |