Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-04-13
17:42:31 jackie-truong Yes, please :-) Thanks, jgwentworth and superdan
17:42:44 superdan jackie-truong: I was looking for you on here earlier today to ask forgiveness for asking to split the patch so late
17:42:45 superdan you not being here led to guilt and me splitting it for you
17:42:46 superdan so, good job.
17:43:06 kashyap superdan: Was AFK; just re-launched IRC client, /me scrolls back
17:43:48 jackie-truong superdan: Sorry I wasn't around. Friday meetings suck. Thanks for splitting the patch - I think it makes a lot more sense that way
17:44:54 superdan kashyap: not a thing anymore
17:45:03 kashyap superdan: Ah, noted.
17:45:09 superdan kashyap: I spent an epic hour or so with sahid getting it all figured out myself
17:45:45 kashyap lyarwood: or any "Stable People": Want to put this out of its misery: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/561168/
17:47:35 kashyap superdan: FWIW, so many TODOs in already one patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/484997/16/nova/virt/libvirt/vif.py?
17:47:45 kashyap A bit moderation would be nice
17:48:16 superdan kashyap: yeah, he's going to move some of the stuff out to another patch, which will pull some TODOs with it
17:48:27 superdan kashyap: they're not TODOs about the patch itself, but some stupid stuff that was in the file before this
17:48:42 superdan like "I noticed this was already wrong when I was in here"
17:48:44 kashyap Ah, I see.
17:48:49 superdan which should be in another patch,
17:48:57 superdan especially because it took me days to suss that out :)
17:48:58 kashyap Right. "One logical change per patch"
17:49:40 jgwentworth jackie-truong: is this the tempest test where we can see the cert validation working end-to-end? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526485
17:50:04 superdan jgwentworth: it's linked in the bottom patch
17:50:08 superdan I don't think that's it
17:50:26 superdan jgwentworth: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/515210/
17:50:31 jgwentworth linked in the comments? cause I don't see anything in the commit message
17:50:36 superdan yeah comments
17:50:47 jgwentworth k, thanks
17:50:57 kashyap superdan: Also, it's never a "mess" (as you put it there) to do connsciousness stream write-ups on reviews are perfectly "legal", as you know :P
17:51:16 superdan I just rechecked it a bit ago after pushing up the split, but it wasn't a change, so the last run of that should be fine for validation
17:51:19 jgwentworth oh, k. I did see that patch but missed that it's tempest via pluginness
17:51:23 superdan kashyap: it's a total mess
17:51:53 kashyap If you say so...
17:52:50 cfriesen do we do anything to prevent a port deletion of a port that is connected to an instance? or should I be asking the neutron folks?
17:53:26 kashyap Unrelated: Are Gerrit review comments look-up-able? As in: I know that dansmith said $unique-phrase on a change, putting that phrase in double quotes in Google will yield the right URL?
17:53:54 superdan what did I say?
17:53:59 jgwentworth yes they are. can't remember how off the top of my head
17:54:11 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add config option to block image-backed servers with 0 root disk flavor https://review.openstack.org/561284
17:54:13 mriedem jgwentworth: mnaser: ^
17:54:32 jgwentworth kashyap: https://review.openstack.org/Documentation/user-search.html#comment
17:54:33 kashyap superdan: Heh, not what you said, but I just took you as an example. Any unique phrase that I know of
17:54:41 mriedem 95% of that patch is test and docs
17:55:04 jgwentworth mriedem: whew, thanks
17:55:30 kashyap jgwentworth: Thanks. So that is searching in review.openstack.org itself.
17:55:56 arvindn05 mriedem: morning :)
17:56:02 jgwentworth kashyap: yeah, like in the serach box you do comment:"unique phrase"
17:56:08 jgwentworth *search
17:56:11 kashyap Thanks. That's useful
17:56:22 arvindn05 mriedem: looks like bauza does not like special case logic in scheduler :(
17:57:35 openstack Launchpad bug 1750623 in OpenStack Compute (nova) queens "rebuild to same host with different image shouldn't check with placement" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Hongbin Lu (hongbin.lu)
17:57:35 arvindn05 mriedem: i did mention to him that we plan to have the logic in the scheduler already as part of the bug fix for https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1750623
18:00:19 arvindn05 bauzas: can we discuss your comments on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560718/ - Handle rebuild of instance with new image?
18:03:20 mriedem arvindn05: bauzas is in france so probably done for the day (it's 8pm there)
18:03:47 mriedem jgwentworth: mnaser: as soon as i pushed that up for review and stepped away for a minute, i thought that is probably better as a policy rule rather than a config option...
18:04:05 mnaser thats an interesting approach
18:04:20 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Parse forbidden traits in query strings https://review.openstack.org/556819
18:04:20 mriedem because if you don't allow users to upload images, then you don't need the warning spam in the nova-api logs,
18:04:22 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Filter resource providers by forbidden traits in db https://review.openstack.org/556472
18:04:23 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Filter allocation candidates by forbidden traits in db https://review.openstack.org/556660
18:04:24 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Support forbidden traits in API https://review.openstack.org/556820
18:04:25 jgwentworth I could see that
18:04:38 mriedem and if you want to play with this feature but only for admins, then you can do that with policy but the config option is either on or off
18:05:20 jgwentworth ah, for the dev/test scenario. yeah
18:05:21 mriedem well, we might have the warning in the logs either way since we don't know if glance is configured to allow image uploads
18:05:23 mriedem for tenants
18:05:44 mriedem the warning is really my way of trying to get people to realize this is a thing if they aren't reading release notes
18:11:46 mnaser i like the idea of making it a policy flag thing, in case you want to allow specific tenants that rely on old behaviour (but you know won't be breaking things)
18:12:30 mriedem yeah me too, it's more flexible
18:12:37 mriedem i'll wait a bit before making changes
18:14:59 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Remove the branch specifier from the nova-multiattach job https://review.openstack.org/560930
18:15:23 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: move version to string in utils https://review.openstack.org/560455
18:15:38 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: refactor get_base_config to accept host arg https://review.openstack.org/560456
18:15:59 mriedem superdan: can you fast approve this on stable? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/560931/
18:16:05 mriedem need that to get the multiattach job voting again on master
18:16:10 superdan can I or will I?
18:16:17 mriedem can you will it
18:21:13 kashyap superdan: I know you did a more robust review, I hope my -1 here is still in the spirit of it: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/484997/16/nova/conf/libvirt.py
18:24:54 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Parse forbidden traits in query strings https://review.openstack.org/556819
18:24:55 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Filter resource providers by forbidden traits in db https://review.openstack.org/556472
18:24:56 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Filter allocation candidates by forbidden traits in db https://review.openstack.org/556660
18:24:57 openstackgerrit Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Support forbidden traits in API https://review.openstack.org/556820
18:28:44 mriedem jgwentworth: mlavalle: posted http://forumtopics.openstack.org/cfp/details/124
18:29:15 jgwentworth coolness. thanks. superdan, want to post the cells one?
18:29:49 mlavalle mriedem: thanks
18:30:33 openstackgerrit Hongbin Lu proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Skip placement on rebuild in same host https://review.openstack.org/561015
18:31:25 mriedem mlavalle: ops might want to ask about routed networsk too, i don't know how much you get for questions about that
18:32:17 mlavalle mriedem: I am not getting many questions lately
18:38:09 superdan jgwentworth: okay
18:45:51 jgwentworth thankee
18:46:25 superdan jgwentworth: http://forumtopics.openstack.org/cfp/details/125
18:46:42 jgwentworth woot
18:49:13 cfriesen got a weird setup. we had in instance on a host in Newton, then deleted the host, then upgraded to Pike (which added uuids to the Service records but apparently not deleted ones), then created the compute node again with the same name. Now when we try to get that instance from the db it chokes, I suspect because it pulls in the deleted host record which has no uuid.
18:49:34 cfriesen should we have applied UUIDs to deleted hosts as well in the Pike online data migration?
18:49:39 jgwentworth there's a bug for that
18:50:58 openstack Launchpad bug 1746509 in OpenStack Compute (nova) pike "TypeError: Can't upgrade a READER transaction to a WRITER mid-transaction" [High,Fix committed] - Assigned to melanie witt (melwitt)
18:50:58 jgwentworth cfriesen: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1746509
18:51:36 jgwentworth did you do your pike upgrade before that merged or was released?
18:51:46 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Add host field to InstanceActionEvent https://review.openstack.org/555146
18:53:13 cfriesen jgwentworth: cool, looks interesting. I need to dig into this a bit more to get the details.
18:54:09 jgwentworth k. yeah, this was specifically having to do with an upgrade scenario where there were already existing service records with no UUID
18:54:22 jgwentworth and instance list failed
18:54:35 cfriesen jgwentworth: do you know why we didn't just apply uuids to deleted services for consistency?

Earlier   Later