| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-04-18 | |||
| 14:55:25 | bauzas | we agreed during the PTG to defer the instance.save() *after* rebuilding and mriedem said he was volunteering thart | |
| 14:55:37 | arvindn05 | yup...if you can make it to the nova meeting tommorow....maybe we can discuss in open topics... | |
| 14:56:03 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: mdevs returning parent and vendor PCI info https://review.openstack.org/562304 | |
| 14:56:15 | bauzas | AFAIR, the nova meeting is EU-compatible this week | |
| 14:56:18 | bauzas | so, yup | |
| 14:56:35 | arvindn05 | great :) | |
| 14:57:14 | arvindn05 | i am not sure mreidem patch would effect me.. | |
| 14:57:36 | arvindn05 | i think we first need to get concensus on whether to invoke placement or not.... | |
| 14:57:46 | bauzas | arvindn05: that's correct | |
| 14:58:04 | bauzas | arvindn05: but until we fix the original bug, adding more checks to the scheduler means more problems | |
| 14:58:21 | bauzas | see my problem ? | |
| 14:58:32 | bauzas | s/my problem/my concern | |
| 14:58:47 | bauzas | jaypipes: efried: oh shit, saw the ML thread | |
| 14:59:00 | bauzas | I thought there was consensus on numbered req groups | |
| 14:59:13 | bauzas | jaypipes: efried: so I wrote my NUMA proposal accordingly | |
| 14:59:18 | efried | bauzas: Meet us in #openstack-placement | |
| 14:59:50 | arvindn05 | bauzas: yup...it does muddy the waters...but still not seeing how it would effect my changes though. how does instance.save() call effect my flow? | |
| 15:01:10 | bauzas | arvindn05: your flow is about adding an extra check to the scheduler which eventually calls placement for traits query, right? | |
| 15:02:37 | openstackgerrit | sahid proposed openstack/nova master: compute: introduce cpu_shared_set option https://review.openstack.org/561912 | |
| 15:02:38 | openstackgerrit | sahid proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: always pass emulator threads policy https://review.openstack.org/561913 | |
| 15:02:39 | openstackgerrit | sahid proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: place emulator threads on CONF.cpu_shared_set https://review.openstack.org/510897 | |
| 15:02:48 | arvindn05 | bauzas: kindof. The extra check calls the GET /resource_providers/{hostUUID}/traits to get traits and match them against the image | |
| 15:03:51 | arvindn05 | so we dont call placemnt allocation candiadates...but make a query to find the traits of the current host and match them against the image traits | |
| 15:04:39 | arvindn05 | bauzas: essentially its this check set(image_traits_required).issubset(set(current_host.traits)) | |
| 15:07:07 | bauzas | arvindn05: sure, but that restricts the subset of hosts right? | |
| 15:07:31 | bauzas | arvindn05: so a host that'd be accepted in the past wouldn't be now accepted, leading to possibly more NoValidHosts | |
| 15:08:52 | arvindn05 | bauzas: we are not checking agaisnt a subset of hosts though...only the current host. | |
| 15:09:24 | arvindn05 | we would get novalid hosts only if the current host the instance is residing upon does not have the traits | |
| 15:10:12 | arvindn05 | the hostuuid in the RP call basically comes from the resource spec `spec_obj.force_hosts[0], spec_obj.force_nodes[0]` | |
| 15:10:25 | arvindn05 | *request spec | |
| 15:10:58 | bauzas | arvindn05: okay here is the thign | |
| 15:11:01 | bauzas | I need to disappear | |
| 15:11:07 | bauzas | but I'll consider your spec | |
| 15:11:09 | cfriesen | this may be a weird question, but why does nova have entries for other services in nova.conf rather than using the keystone endpoint list? | |
| 15:11:12 | bauzas | and comment it | |
| 15:11:24 | arvindn05 | bauzas: no problem...thanks. | |
| 15:15:31 | melwitt | gibi: hey, I'm going to be around early tomorrow, so I'll be able to run the meeting. thanks for the offer :) | |
| 15:23:04 | efried | cfriesen: What "entries"? | |
| 15:23:19 | efried | cfriesen: The auth stuff is necessary on a per-service basis, obviously. | |
| 15:24:23 | efried | cfriesen: To identify endpoints, we should be able to use the service catalog for everything other than cinder at this point. I don't think we've fixed up devstack to do that for everything, but I know we've at least hit glance. | |
| 15:24:48 | gibi | melwitt: OK, cool. | |
| 15:25:16 | fghaas | lyarwood: I'll have to drop off shortly for family obligations — I've requested a review from you on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/562145/ which kashyap mentioned earlier; hope that's OK with you. No rush on this at all of course; we do have a workaround in place. | |
| 15:25:28 | efried | Where's ol mriedem today? | |
| 15:25:29 | openstackgerrit | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Bump MIN_{LIBVIRT,QEMU}_VERSION for "Rocky" https://review.openstack.org/558783 | |
| 15:25:30 | openstackgerrit | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: Drop MIN_LIBVIRT_SET_ADMIN_PASSWD https://review.openstack.org/562312 | |
| 15:25:31 | openstackgerrit | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Drop MIN_LIBVIRT_PARALLELS_SET_ADMIN_PASSWD https://review.openstack.org/562313 | |
| 15:25:35 | gibi | melwitt, efried: I've got the approval today to travel to the Vancouver summit so I can help with the onboarding session | |
| 15:25:43 | efried | cool | |
| 15:26:14 | melwitt | gibi: woot, coolness | |
| 15:26:40 | gibi | melwitt, efried: If you have any material about past onboarding sessions then link it to me so I can try thinkig about what I will talk about there | |
| 15:29:31 | efried | dansmith: Should this return True for the 404 case? https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/client/report.py#L1849-L1855 | |
| 15:30:34 | efried | dansmith: I noticed the return value is only checked in this call: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/manager.py#L3799-L3808 | |
| 15:30:40 | gibi | melwitt: do we plan to have a nova-neutron cross project discussion on the summit? | |
| 15:31:00 | efried | dansmith: So I guess my question is, can/should we still short-circuit there if the instance is already gone? | |
| 15:31:10 | melwitt | gibi: yes, we have this http://forumtopics.openstack.org/cfp/details/124 | |
| 15:31:45 | gibi | melwitt: cool, it even contains the bandwidth topic I wanted to add | |
| 15:32:48 | melwitt | gibi: as for past onboarding session material, I'm not sure anyone has anything saved. last time's session was ad hoc, and the time before I wasn't helping with (I was in the room for only the end of it). dansmith, is there any linkable material from the boston onboarding session that gibi could look at? | |
| 15:32:55 | dansmith | efried: well, does 404 there always refer to the allocation? or could it refer to the RP? | |
| 15:33:27 | dansmith | melwitt: we posted an annotated log of an instance boot in devstack | |
| 15:33:41 | efried | dansmith: It refers to the consumer being gone. | |
| 15:33:47 | dansmith | melwitt: that might still exist, but it's probably worth re-generating it at this point, if you're going to do that same schtick | |
| 15:34:00 | dansmith | efried: you mean the allocation yeah/ | |
| 15:34:35 | gibi | dansmith, melwitt: thanks | |
| 15:34:36 | melwitt | gibi: this time I'm going to try to prepare some slides in case we need them. apparently this is the sort of thing the foundation recommends we do or at least have available if the room is total newcomers https://www.slideshare.net/JayBryant2/openstack-cinder-onboarding-education-boston-summit-2017 | |
| 15:35:16 | efried | dansmith: Looking at what compute manager does after that, it'll try to get that allocation again, and short-circuit out at *that* point. | |
| 15:35:41 | dansmith | efried: tbh, I would still raise a NotFound there instead of returning a boolean, but it should return False, since the code is using that to determine if the other side of the migration was new or not.. "it's already gone" is not what it's checking for | |
| 15:35:43 | efried | dansmith: So the harm is only one redundant placement call (and an info log). | |
| 15:36:20 | dansmith | efried: see above.. this is not just trying to nuke the allocation, it needs to know whether it existed or not | |
| 15:36:26 | cfriesen | efried: I'm thinking of the [glance]/api_servers or [neutron]/url | |
| 15:36:55 | efried | dansmith: Okay. So the report client method is doing the right thing; it's just that that thing is a bit confusing. | |
| 15:37:18 | dansmith | efried: well, like I said, if it raised NotFound there and we were catching it, I think it might be a little more obvious | |
| 15:37:29 | efried | :return: True if the instance's allocations were deleted; False if they were not (which is also the case if the allocations weren't there to begin with) | |
| 15:37:29 | efried | dansmith: The docstring would say: | |
| 15:37:31 | cfriesen | efried: although, I guess those are now optional rather than required | |
| 15:37:38 | dansmith | efried: instead of "did we delete it?" we'd be saying "We deleted it" or "it didn't exist" which is what we're really after | |
| 15:37:59 | efried | cfriesen: Correct. | |
| 15:38:24 | efried | cfriesen: deprecated, in the latter case. In the former case, only use api_servers if you actually *need* multiple endpoints. | |
| 15:38:47 | efried | cfriesen: There was work over the past couple of releases to make that happen. I can find the bp if you like... | |
| 15:39:18 | efried | cfriesen: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/use-ksa-adapter-for-endpoints | |
| 15:39:52 | efried | cfriesen: Note the one that's still open. I would welcome someone jumping in and finishing that one... | |
| 15:39:53 | cfriesen | efried: thanks | |
| 15:41:37 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Fix docs for confirmResize action https://review.openstack.org/562062 | |
| 15:42:32 | gibi | melwitt: OK. If you need help perparing or reviewing such slideset then I'm happy to help | |
| 15:43:06 | melwitt | thanks | |
| 15:43:07 | openstackgerrit | Nguyen Hai proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Follow the new PTI for document build https://review.openstack.org/551802 | |
| 15:49:36 | arvindn05 | jaypipes: wanted to get your thoughts on role of placement during rebuild | |
| 15:50:07 | openstackgerrit | Nguyen Hai proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Follow the new PTI for document build https://review.openstack.org/551802 | |
| 15:50:59 | openstackgerrit | Nguyen Hai proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Follow the new PTI for document build https://review.openstack.org/551802 | |
| 15:56:31 | jaypipes | arvindn05: currently deep in the middle of teasing apart the @safe_connect decorator from the placement report client... may be some time until I can get to that :( | |
| 15:59:29 | arvindn05 | ahh..ok...will bounce the idea off matt for now :) | |
| 16:17:42 | openstackgerrit | Zhenyu Zheng proposed openstack/nova master: Deduplicate notification samples Rocky - 7 https://review.openstack.org/560748 | |
| 16:42:02 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: mock utils.execute() in qemu-img unit test https://review.openstack.org/562339 | |
| 16:44:27 | openstack | bug 1764556 in OpenStack Compute (nova) ""nova list" fails with exception.ServiceNotFound if service is deleted and has no UUID" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1764556 | |
| 16:44:27 | cfriesen | melwitt: had a thought on bug 1764556. If we deleted the compute node, recreated it, and migrated the instance back prior to the upgrade to Pike I think we could end up with the DB in the problem state. On the other hand, that seems like a pretty unlikely scenario. | |
| 16:47:50 | melwitt | cfriesen: what would be the full sequence there? sorry, I forgot what the original sequence was regarding deleting of the service, migration, re-create service, migrate etc | |
| 16:48:24 | cfriesen | melwitt: boot instance, migrate instance, delete compute node, create new compute node with same name, migrate instance to new compute node, upgrade to pike | |
| 16:50:49 | melwitt | okay. does seem unlikely but I wouldn't be surprised if someone someday would happen to do it | |
| 16:54:04 | cfriesen | melwitt: our local solution is to modify the online data migration in pike to put uuids on deleted services | |
| 16:54:30 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/os-vif master: Add lower-constraints job https://review.openstack.org/556056 | |
| 16:55:32 | melwitt | ack | |