| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-02-13 | |||
| 16:40:09 | gibi | mriedem: I in that context manager this is coming from we does not delete claims | |
| 16:40:14 | mriedem | so if that fails, we should cleanup and exit | |
| 16:40:47 | mriedem | the claim is made in prep_resize on the dest | |
| 16:41:02 | mriedem | before we rpc cast to resize_instance | |
| 16:41:38 | gibi | mriedem: ahh that was the missing piece | |
| 16:41:50 | gibi | mriedem: thanks, now I have a place to look at | |
| 16:42:53 | mriedem | what i'm not sure about is if/when the dest host RT updates its usage after the migration fails to remove the claim | |
| 16:43:52 | mriedem | migrations = objects.MigrationList.get_in_progress_by_host_and_node( | |
| 16:43:52 | mriedem | # Grab all in-progress migrations: | |
| 16:43:53 | mriedem | self._update_usage_from_migrations(context, migrations, nodename) | |
| 16:43:53 | mriedem | self._pair_instances_to_migrations(migrations, instances) | |
| 16:43:53 | mriedem | context, self.host, nodename) | |
| 16:43:59 | mriedem | that should update the dest host RT at some point | |
| 16:44:08 | mriedem | once the migration fails, it will no longer be in that in-progress list | |
| 16:46:37 | gibi | mriedem: in my env I don't see that this Exception handler is called during the failed resize: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/fa6c0f9cb14f1b4ce4d9b1dbacb1743173089986/nova/compute/manager.py#L4124 | |
| 16:47:00 | mriedem | gibi: it's not, | |
| 16:47:08 | mriedem | because we've already rpc cast to the source host | |
| 16:47:26 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/fa6c0f9cb14f1b4ce4d9b1dbacb1743173089986/nova/compute/manager.py#L4085 | |
| 16:47:39 | mriedem | that's why claudiub's original fix was to change that to an rpc call | |
| 16:47:51 | mriedem | so the failure would come back to prep_resize on the dest and we'd run that cleanup code | |
| 16:48:03 | mriedem | but rpc calls just mean messaging timeouts | |
| 16:48:06 | mriedem | so i'd rather not do that | |
| 16:48:08 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-novaclient stable/queens: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/543741 | |
| 16:48:09 | gibi | mriedem: OK, then I understand what I see. | |
| 16:48:18 | gibi | mriedem: thanks again | |
| 16:48:45 | gibi | mriedem: I have to run now but if the problem still open then I can look at it again tomorrow | |
| 17:04:50 | hegemoOn | hello there | |
| 17:05:04 | hegemoOn | is it possible to define the number of queue in an image metadata | |
| 17:05:15 | hegemoOn | when using virtion-scsi ? | |
| 17:09:05 | mriedem | stephenfin: on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/531413/ - i think i might decouple the re-wording part so we can backport that, since i see some other config guide docs that reference that option | |
| 17:11:00 | stephenfin | mriedem: Sure thing. The reservation was because we haven't removed deprecated aliases before, that I'm aware of (there's little cost in keeping them). Worth making sure it was intentional | |
| 17:11:13 | mriedem | i'm sure we've removed deprecated aliases before | |
| 17:11:29 | mriedem | maybe not recently, but it was pretty common cleanup back in the day | |
| 17:12:01 | stephenfin | :D | |
| 17:12:15 | stephenfin | numa-aware-vswitches has me plenty busy :) | |
| 17:14:44 | hegemoOn | in virsh xml you have <driver queues='n'> | |
| 17:14:56 | hegemoOn | for virtio-scsi | |
| 17:15:09 | hegemoOn | i cannot see a way to define n in nova | |
| 17:16:27 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix and update compute schedulers config guide https://review.openstack.org/544010 | |
| 17:19:28 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: Move db MAX constants to own file https://review.openstack.org/543469 | |
| 17:21:17 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove the deprecated scheduler_driver_task_period option https://review.openstack.org/531413 | |
| 17:21:18 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Clarify the help text for [scheduler]periodic_task_interval https://review.openstack.org/544015 | |
| 17:24:50 | stephenfin | mriedem: Should I have +Wd this, given that you've a -2 on the following patch? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/539738/ | |
| 17:25:00 | stephenfin | I can rebase and take it out of the gate if not | |
| 17:25:32 | mriedem | it's a bug fix | |
| 17:25:35 | mriedem | so i don't think so | |
| 17:25:48 | stephenfin | Phew. Okidok | |
| 17:25:53 | mriedem | i mean, it's not a problem | |
| 17:27:57 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove warning in feature support matrix page https://review.openstack.org/544017 | |
| 17:30:59 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Check for leaked server resource allocations in post_test_hook https://review.openstack.org/538510 | |
| 17:31:14 | openstackgerrit | James E. Blair proposed openstack/python-novaclient stable/ocata: Zuul: Remove project name https://review.openstack.org/544018 | |
| 17:32:00 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova stable/pike: Query all cells for service version in _validate_bdm https://review.openstack.org/541036 | |
| 17:33:03 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: Use correct arguments in task inits https://review.openstack.org/543571 | |
| 17:34:42 | mriedem | lyarwood: dansmith: bauzas: so before i request the next pike release, do i have to bump the minor version to 16.1.0 for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/528330/ because it's a schema migration; i will forever remember the red hat product team lashing i got for *not* doing something like that back in newton | |
| 17:35:49 | dansmith | um | |
| 17:35:51 | dansmith | okay | |
| 17:36:02 | dansmith | bump the minor _to_ what? | |
| 17:36:10 | mriedem | 16.0.4 -> 16.1.0 | |
| 17:36:15 | dansmith | oh I see | |
| 17:36:18 | mriedem | i would normally just do 16.0.5 | |
| 17:36:23 | mriedem | but caught hell for doing that once | |
| 17:36:24 | dansmith | I don't think I know anything about that | |
| 17:40:47 | mriedem | alright 16.1.0 it is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/544020/ | |
| 18:29:43 | lyarwood | mriedem: 16.1.0 is fine by me, this is still an optional schema migration until queens anyway right so anyone not running migrations after updating nova during stable/pike will pick it up when they upgrade to queens. | |
| 18:31:15 | lyarwood | mriedem: FWIW with TripleO/RDO I can't see us ever running schema migrations with each minor update (16.0.4 to 16.1.0 etc) | |
| 18:31:48 | dansmith | lyarwood: apparently a minor version change kicks the "do the db sync" flag on | |
| 18:32:21 | lyarwood | dansmith: not in any of our tooling | |
| 18:32:32 | lyarwood | dansmith: just the poor ops guy who notices the change | |
| 18:32:46 | dansmith | lyarwood: supposedly bauzas beat up mriedem about it last time on that basis | |
| 18:34:29 | lyarwood | owalsh: ^ re minor updates on TripleO, we don't run schema migrations at all right? | |
| 18:35:30 | dansmith | if not then bauzas should pay for mriedem's therapist bills | |
| 18:35:50 | lyarwood | dansmith: I can only assume his point was that we should still highlight to ops etc that the update contains a schema migration by bumping the minor release or something | |
| 18:39:49 | owalsh | lyarwood: correct, just restart services | |
| 18:40:11 | lyarwood | owalsh: cool thanks | |
| 18:40:24 | dansmith | death match round 2, dublin | |
| 18:53:36 | mriedem | fork in the kidneys, check | |
| 19:55:15 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Replace Chinese quotes to English quotes https://review.openstack.org/543349 | |
| 19:56:31 | dansmith | efried: jaypipes: seen the question on this? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/540111/3 | |
| 19:56:45 | dansmith | I was about to reply, but then realized I was misunderstanding his concern and I think it's probably valid | |
| 19:57:06 | dansmith | hoping that there's some detail of how you see that working that wouldn't actually break it | |
| 19:57:46 | efried | dansmith: It's been on my list to look at, but was rapidly getting buried. Thanks for bringing it back to the top. Looking.... | |
| 19:58:58 | mriedem | been wondering the same type of thing with traits, | |
| 19:59:12 | mriedem | the ironic driver will blow away any traits that aren't on the ironic node | |
| 19:59:16 | mriedem | rather than try to merge the | |
| 19:59:18 | mriedem | *them | |
| 19:59:27 | dansmith | well, there needs to be some amount of that I think, | |
| 19:59:36 | dansmith | although we can't blow them all away in this case I think | |
| 19:59:49 | dansmith | was hoping there was some "only blows away at the given level" detail or something | |
| 20:00:09 | efried | mriedem: I remember that being discussed at length (for ironic traits), and the conclusion in that case was that the ironic inspector was the Source Of Truth, so it was kosher to blow away anything that crept in from elsewhere. | |
| 20:00:26 | mriedem | idk, it seems quite limiting | |
| 20:00:41 | dansmith | efried: it is for sure until the compute service starts needing to do some too, like for capabilities | |
| 20:00:52 | mriedem | if we have an external system to model resources that other services outside of nova can interact with, it seems wrong to completely trample them | |
| 20:00:53 | dansmith | in that case compute might be able to do its own merging, | |
| 20:01:05 | dansmith | but for this inventory thing, nic bandwidth is probably a good example | |
| 20:01:06 | mriedem | dansmith: yeah that's what i had to do in my poc patch for the capabilities thing | |
| 20:01:10 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 20:01:29 | efried | So I agree that we don't want to make it a rule that virt blows away children it doesn't recognize. | |
| 20:01:32 | dansmith | so maybe for this we could get the inventory from the vif modeling somehow? | |
| 20:01:44 | mriedem | trying to balance the stance we've had in the past against things like metrics providers in-tree saying that's all best served outside of nova, | |
| 20:01:54 | efried | But the design (and imple) is flexible enough that we don't need to make that rule at this level. | |