Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-06-06
21:46:37 mriedem dansmith: i know there was an iops one that i saw
21:46:41 mriedem that was the only one i saw i guess
21:47:49 dansmith mriedem: well, what do you think?
21:48:02 openstackgerrit Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_image_certificates to REST API https://review.openstack.org/486204
21:48:03 openstackgerrit Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add notification support for trusted_certs https://review.openstack.org/563269
21:48:04 openstackgerrit Brianna Poulos proposed openstack/nova master: Add certificate validation docs https://review.openstack.org/560158
21:48:26 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Trivial: let internal use only func has _ prefix https://review.openstack.org/572304
21:50:19 mriedem sorry i got artom'ed
21:50:41 artom im in ur patch, artoming ur patch
21:50:42 dansmith ouch
21:50:54 mriedem dansmith: if negative makes more sense then that's fine by me
21:51:00 melwitt dansmith: if none of the other weighers auto-negate things, I would think it's more intuitive if it's specified as a negative number. with the thinking that if the normal pattern is "bigger numbers win" then specifying a larger negative number means weight a failure as far less likely to be selected
21:51:01 mriedem honestly the weight multipliers break my head
21:51:14 dansmith well, I dunno
21:51:14 melwitt am I thinking about that right?
21:51:32 dansmith melwitt: the way I think of all our weighers, the bigger the number, the more significance it has
21:51:43 melwitt I'd want to pick something that fits in best with what's there so that people who already use it don't have to reverse their thinking for that one option
21:51:50 dansmith however, there area few where you may want affinity or the opposite, so you can do negative or positive
21:51:52 melwitt *already use weights
21:52:00 dansmith you likely never want to prefer hosts that suck,
21:52:19 dansmith so I dunno that it would ever be positive (if we didn't auto-negate)
21:52:32 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/conf/scheduler.py#L428 is the one i noticed
21:52:44 mriedem oh and this https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/conf/scheduler.py#L737
21:52:49 mriedem weight_of_unavailable...
21:53:25 dansmith that's a bit different
21:54:02 dansmith and the iops one can be positive or negative with useful meaning
21:54:10 melwitt do the other negative ones ever make sense as positive values? k
21:54:52 dansmith yes, ops defaults negative, but changing it to positive means something useful
21:55:07 dansmith soft_anti_affinity and soft_affinity are both positive, but have opposite meanings
21:55:38 dansmith https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/weights/affinity.py#L93-L96
21:55:39 melwitt so if it auto negates ... to make build fails even less likely to schedule toward, you would increase the positive value. that is, make build failures heavier
21:55:42 dansmith Just like I do ^
21:56:19 dansmith melwitt: right, if it auto-negates (as it does now) then you raise the number to make build failures more significant (i.e. less likely to be chosen)
21:56:31 dansmith I think that anti-affinity one is my proof that I'm okay
21:56:33 melwitt yeah, that makes sense to me
21:56:45 dansmith it auto-negates because it makes more sense to have a positive value for significance
21:56:55 melwitt yeah it's like a coefficient I guess
21:57:10 mriedem i left a question in there, but should we put a min value on the multiplier?
21:57:14 melwitt I think either way is find, both make sense in their own way
21:57:17 mriedem otherwise anything negative weighs failed hosts higher right?
21:57:19 melwitt *fine
21:57:45 dansmith mriedem: I dunno, if somene wanted to actually select recent fails, they could set it to -BIG, which ... maybe?
21:57:50 dansmith if they do auto-disable on their own,
21:57:59 dansmith they may want recently-fixed hosts to be super important or something?
21:58:00 mriedem via notifications or something
21:58:04 melwitt although allowing negative and positive values could make you favor build failures if you mess up, so maybe that is worse
21:58:10 dansmith I wouldn't document that, but if you remove the ability, then they can't
21:58:19 mriedem sure
21:58:24 mriedem anywho
21:58:24 dansmith melwitt: right but if you do ^ then maybe you want that
21:58:41 mriedem watcher could have it's own super awesome auto-disabler
21:58:43 dansmith I think I'm going to leave it as-is, I convinced myself with the anti-affinity precedent
21:59:30 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Block swap volume on volumes with >1 rw attachment https://review.openstack.org/572790
22:01:28 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Change consecutive build failure limit to a weigher https://review.openstack.org/572195
22:14:39 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Block swap volume on volumes with >1 rw attachment https://review.openstack.org/572790
22:15:58 dansmith mriedem: oh, those were all in default previously I guess? we should update that doc
22:17:47 mriedem i'm sure they are old yeah
22:17:52 mriedem but we can cleanup the rest in a follow up
22:17:57 mriedem they likely have a rename alias
22:18:19 dansmith yeah they do
22:18:28 dansmith I didn't even process that as the config section,
22:18:37 dansmith I just copied a block and changed the names
22:19:12 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Change consecutive build failure limit to a weigher https://review.openstack.org/572195
22:25:49 mriedem in trumps america, i process it for you
22:26:20 mriedem i think i'll just fast approve given sylvain was +2
22:26:22 mriedem is that ok?
22:26:42 melwitt I was going to +2 it once you were okay with it
22:27:05 mriedem ok all yours
22:28:20 melwitt en route to the sarlacc put
22:28:29 melwitt *pit
22:28:46 mriedem i hope you get that reference
22:28:49 mriedem otherwise, for shame
22:29:11 mriedem oh btw,
22:29:13 melwitt of course I do! I'm hip like that
22:29:19 mriedem dansmith didn't like evil dead 2
22:29:22 mriedem as expected
22:29:30 dansmith correction
22:29:33 melwitt lol
22:29:37 dansmith I didn't like the first 45 minutes of it
22:29:44 dansmith I have no idea about the second 45 minutes
22:30:04 mriedem did you at least see where he fights his own hand?
22:30:12 dansmith yeah
22:30:17 mriedem well alright then
22:30:20 mriedem also,
22:30:29 mriedem efried sorta looks like bruce from evil dead
22:30:40 mriedem efried: you should take advantage of that on halloween
22:30:42 melwitt *mind blown*
22:30:43 mriedem or really any day
22:30:44 efried I've actually heard that before.
22:31:10 mriedem do you frequently say to your wife, "gimme some sugar, baby"?
22:31:31 mriedem if so, you might be ash
22:31:42 efried I may have seen those movies once, 20 years ago. They're not auto-memes that just spring forth from my head, I'm afraid.
22:32:06 mriedem i saw the first one between slitted fingers when i was probably <10
22:32:10 mriedem so it's burned in there
22:32:12 mriedem the granny in the basement
22:32:15 melwitt lol
22:33:03 efried I can totally quote Finding Nemo, though.
22:33:10 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Block swap volume on volumes with >1 rw attachment https://review.openstack.org/572790
22:33:14 efried dansmith sorta looks like Marlin
22:33:30 dansmith isn't that an animated fish?

Earlier   Later