| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-04-06 | |||
| 13:31:02 | mriedem | so i'm not sure how we leverage placement-req-filter with ironic node aggregates in placement yet | |
| 13:31:07 | sean-k-mooney | jroll: no worries just giving one option. i think we agree this is a valid usecase that should be supported. how is a question that can be adressed later | |
| 13:31:54 | mriedem | not sure if traits would get us there, traits are the new metadata bastard child | |
| 13:33:12 | openstackgerrit | Tyler Blakeslee proposed openstack/nova master: Use six.text_type instead of str in NovaException __repr__ https://review.openstack.org/559169 | |
| 13:33:16 | jroll | mriedem: yeah, makes sense, thank you | |
| 13:33:47 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: i think jay would argue this is not a qualitive capablity of the resouce accounting so traits are not the best way but use it would work with traits | |
| 13:34:15 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. custom_rack1 but again that is not user facing | |
| 13:37:31 | mriedem | jroll: i think i get what you meant by "alloc candidates aren't exposed to the user" - in that there is no user-facing compute API to translate a request for node aggregates (in placement) to the nova scheduler | |
| 13:38:34 | cdent | mriedem: traits can take us anywhere we want to go, if we're willing. Such is the danger of traits. | |
| 13:38:52 | finucannot | leakypipes: I was literally just tab completing your name. Morning o/ | |
| 13:38:56 | jroll | mriedem: yes, exactly. maybe there's a new api eventually, maybe instance groups affinity moves to use placement aggregates, maybe it's traits. dunno, need to think about it | |
| 13:39:13 | finucannot | leakypipes: Does this sound like something you could tackle today? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553072/ | |
| 13:39:30 | mriedem | jroll: yeah, needs some thought - gut feeling is traits isn't the answer here | |
| 13:39:34 | jroll | agree | |
| 13:39:36 | mriedem | munging aggregates with traits i mean | |
| 13:39:54 | mriedem | cdent: yes that's readily apparent already :) | |
| 13:40:03 | mriedem | bbiab | |
| 13:40:54 | cdent | jroll: meh, if people want that kind of rope, maybe that's what the rope should do? | |
| 13:41:05 | jroll | cdent: not when they leave me to clean up the mess :P | |
| 13:41:14 | cdent | traits are effectively the same thing as labels in k8s, aren't they? | |
| 13:41:15 | jroll | I mean my specific downstream, to be clear :) | |
| 13:41:32 | cdent | that's a good point. If it's you on the hook to suffer, slap away | |
| 14:02:39 | leakypipes | finucannot: morning sir! :) | |
| 14:11:32 | kashyap | mriedem: I think you're the closest to ACK this: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/544238/ ("libvirt: Block swapping to an encrypted volume when using QEMU to decrypt") | |
| 14:11:39 | kashyap | Trivial diff-stat, though. | |
| 14:14:30 | mriedem | cdent: the other thing with giving that rope is people build solutions off it, and then when the time comes that we want to change anything related to it, we break those solutions | |
| 14:14:47 | mriedem | and if it's fairly nebulous we don't really know how anyone is using it | |
| 14:15:02 | cdent | traits are part of the (immutable?) api of placement | |
| 14:15:08 | cdent | so how it is used in placement is stuck | |
| 14:15:16 | cdent | how it is used in nova, though, that's different | |
| 14:15:33 | mriedem | with microversions the placement api isn't immutable | |
| 14:15:34 | cdent | (not disagreeing with you) | |
| 14:15:43 | mriedem | but yes i don't expect how placement handles traits to change much | |
| 14:15:50 | cdent | it is in the sense that we'll never raise the minimum | |
| 14:15:54 | mriedem | and yes how they are incorporated into nova is the messy part | |
| 14:16:08 | mriedem | or could be messy | |
| 14:16:27 | mriedem | right now traits-based scheduling from queens is pretty straight forward | |
| 14:16:48 | mriedem | 'put me on a host with trait=foo, got it' | |
| 14:22:30 | mriedem | mmedvede: i got a pkvm ci failure setting up devstack here https://dal05.objectstorage.softlayer.net/v1/AUTH_3d8e6ecb-f597-448c-8ec2-164e9f710dd6/pkvmci/nova/20/324720/5/check/tempest-dsvm-full-xenial/b59cb03/devstacklog.txt.gz | |
| 14:22:41 | mriedem | Connecting to cirros-builder.novalocal (cirros-builder.novalocal)|9.114.111.40|:80... failed: No route to host. | |
| 14:23:26 | mriedem | jgwentworth: fyi, i had emailed the virtuozzo team about their CI failing at least a week ago, so it's a known issue | |
| 14:23:42 | mriedem | ImagePropertiesFilter always kicks out whatever their trying to use for an image | |
| 14:25:55 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Skip placement on rebuild in same host https://review.openstack.org/546357 | |
| 14:33:15 | odyssey4me | howdy everyone, thanks again for your help so far - we have an upgrade task failing which might be due to new changes in rocky... would this be a change in something that needs to happen? http://logs.openstack.org/78/558078/2/check/openstack-ansible-upgrade-ubuntu-xenial-nv/3dc2358/logs/ara-report/result/b9fe5b27-00e6-455b-9a10-71b2046663c5/ | |
| 14:33:33 | edmondsw | fyi, someone is trying to add suppz support to the libvirt driver, but seems to be doing that off on their own | |
| 14:33:36 | edmondsw | https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/113484/add-support-for-a-new-driver-in-nova/ | |
| 14:33:45 | edmondsw | I tried to point them in the right direction | |
| 14:34:29 | jgwentworth | mriedem: okay, so virtuozzo CI currently broken and being worked on | |
| 14:36:13 | mriedem | lyarwood: so in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/544238/4/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py we also can't do the swap if both volumes are encrypted? | |
| 14:36:52 | mriedem | jgwentworth: it's a known issue, i'm not sure how actively they are working to fix it | |
| 14:38:17 | mriedem | odyssey4me: that looks like the new 'disabled' colum in the nova_api.cell_mappings table, has the nova_api db been synced before running this? | |
| 14:38:27 | lyarwood | mriedem: correct | |
| 14:38:48 | mriedem | tssurya: ^ | |
| 14:39:53 | odyssey4me | mriedem well, that's a queens to rocky upgrade, so yes - it was done in the queens deployment | |
| 14:40:18 | kashyap | lyarwood: Probably that should point also be documented as a note in the code? (With current limitations.) | |
| 14:40:27 | mriedem | odyssey4me: if you're upgrading to rocky and you already created the cell0 mapping in queens, you don't need to do it again | |
| 14:41:25 | mriedem | odyssey4me: although, map_cell0 should be smarter, it has a check for DBDuplicateEntry for running it when it already exists | |
| 14:41:43 | jgwentworth | mriedem: okay. would you say it's too soon to mail the ML to describe the issue and ask if anyone on their side can look into it? | |
| 14:42:09 | mriedem | jgwentworth: i emailed the vz CI email a couple of weeks ago, and got a reply this week, but deleted that reply | |
| 14:42:22 | mriedem | i'd give it maybe another week? | |
| 14:42:38 | jgwentworth | k, will do. thanks | |
| 14:42:57 | mriedem | odyssey4me: so i don't think we're getting the duplicate entry b/c it's trying to create the cell0 mapping in the api db, and that fails because the object code doesn't match the api db schema | |
| 14:43:31 | mriedem | odyssey4me: which tells me that nova-manage api_db sync hasn't been run on rocky yet | |
| 14:43:35 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1739593 in OpenStack Security Advisory "Swapping encrypted volumes can lead to data loss and a possible compute host DOS attack (CVE-2017-18191)" [Undecided,Incomplete] | |
| 14:43:35 | lyarwood | mriedem: thanks, btw https://review.openstack.org/#/c/543569/ is the change covering this all prior to Queens where we would hit https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1739593, it would be great to land this in stable/ocata and pike sometime soon to close that all out. | |
| 14:44:04 | mriedem | lyarwood: i've tried to purge that from my memory | |
| 14:44:09 | odyssey4me | mriedem hmm, IIRC on an upgrade the steps are different - we have this now, so you're right: https://github.com/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/blob/e3e7c1f00bd7155dc051ba093fc872751776f769/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml | |
| 14:45:34 | lyarwood | mriedem: you and me both, definitely a mistake on my part to label this as a security issue | |
| 14:46:10 | mriedem | odyssey4me: so https://github.com/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/blob/e3e7c1f00bd7155dc051ba093fc872751776f769/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml is getting run all over again on an upgrade from queens to rocky? | |
| 14:46:49 | odyssey4me | mriedem yes, that sequence is run for greenfield, or upgrade - but the result of 'Get the api_db version' would be different if it was an upgrade | |
| 14:47:06 | mriedem | odyssey4me: oh i see the problem https://github.com/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/blob/e3e7c1f00bd7155dc051ba093fc872751776f769/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml#L29 | |
| 14:47:16 | mriedem | yeah looking at http://logs.openstack.org/78/558078/2/check/openstack-ansible-upgrade-ubuntu-xenial-nv/3dc2358/logs/ara-report/reports/68ffa953-cc0e-494b-89b9-dcf7ca4a8b59.html | |
| 14:47:29 | mriedem | so "Perform a Nova API DB sync" doesn't get run | |
| 14:47:30 | mriedem | that's a problem | |
| 14:47:53 | odyssey4me | ok, but that gets run later | |
| 14:48:03 | odyssey4me | IIRC this relates to the difference in procedure for greenfield vs upgrade | |
| 14:48:20 | odyssey4me | this might only have been an ocata/pike thing though, when cells v2 was all new | |
| 14:48:24 | mriedem | how did you upgrade from ocata to pike, or pike to queens? | |
| 14:48:34 | mriedem | i guess we haven't added a new cell mappings field sine then | |
| 14:48:36 | mriedem | so that's why | |
| 14:48:53 | odyssey4me | this same procedure is used - ocata->pike: https://github.com/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/blob/stable/pike/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml | |
| 14:49:11 | odyssey4me | pike->queens: https://github.com/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/blob/stable/queens/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml | |
| 14:49:29 | mriedem | yeah, we just have'nt added a new cell_mappings column in queens or pike | |
| 14:49:36 | odyssey4me | aha, ok | |
| 14:49:41 | mriedem | so, we can fix this in one of two ways: | |
| 14:49:56 | odyssey4me | so this conditional set is only important for the newton->ocata upgrade? | |
| 14:50:02 | mriedem | 1. nova-manage cell_v2 map_cell0 can do a db query for cell0 rather than rely on a DBDuplicateEntry | |
| 14:50:10 | mriedem | 2. you can run nova-manage api_db sync unconditionally | |
| 14:50:48 | odyssey4me | we're very happy to shorten and simplify the steps taken, so option 2 sounds good to me | |
| 14:51:29 | odyssey4me | I'll push a patch up shortly. I'll ping you to verify the review if that's ok? | |
| 14:51:31 | mriedem | fwiw, grenade also runs map_cell0 on upgrade and cell0 is already mapped http://logs.openstack.org/38/544238/4/check/neutron-grenade/d101bba/logs/grenade.sh.txt.gz#_2018-04-05_09_41_34_277 | |
| 14:51:48 | mriedem | sure. i'm not ansible guy, but i can see if the non-voting upgrade job is green or not :) | |
| 14:52:33 | odyssey4me | :) hopefully we can make it as readable as a shell task procedure | |
| 14:52:42 | mriedem | oh looky here http://logs.openstack.org/38/544238/4/check/neutron-grenade/d101bba/logs/grenade.sh.txt.gz#_2018-04-05_09_41_25_031 | |
| 14:52:49 | mriedem | grenade hits the same thing but doesn't fail for some reason | |
| 14:56:11 | tssurya | sorry was afk, that doesn't look goo | |
| 14:56:14 | tssurya | good* | |
| 14:57:40 | odyssey4me | mriedem maybe someone couldn't figure it out and added || true ;) | |
| 14:58:41 | odyssey4me | jokes aside, that's quite serious... but I'm glad we're not alone, and that we could find a red flag :) | |
| 14:58:48 | mriedem | it's hitting htis https://github.com/openstack-dev/grenade/blob/master/projects/60_nova/upgrade.sh#L74 | |