| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-06-11 | |||
| 15:24:09 | mriedem | maybe new gerrit / zuul doesn't show that now? | |
| 15:29:22 | dansmith | idk, seems confusing | |
| 15:29:32 | dansmith | because zuul -1s and reports few jobs, all passing | |
| 15:30:02 | dansmith | efried: left comments on your spec from skimming | |
| 15:31:24 | efried | dansmith: Thanks. Are you going to do a patch set adding words for things you said you were going to compose? | |
| 15:31:53 | dansmith | efried: I commented on that one place, which I think is enough, but I think you have things you need to tweak anyway right? | |
| 15:32:23 | efried | dansmith: I do. Okay, I'll add that in, if you think that's enough. | |
| 15:32:36 | efried | terse guy that you are. | |
| 15:32:45 | dansmith | efried: you covered what it'll do pretty well I think | |
| 15:32:55 | efried | okay, good | |
| 15:34:47 | mriedem | naichuans: is it possible to get a test run for the xenserver ci with image_handler=vdi_remote_stream to make sure this code passes tempest? | |
| 15:36:44 | efried | dansmith: If (found, done) == (!0, 0), it means there are non-migratable records. What am I supposed to do if I get that? | |
| 15:37:05 | dansmith | efried: who is "I" in that case? | |
| 15:37:18 | dansmith | efried: if "I" is the CLI user, I think it's handled in the docs for that command | |
| 15:37:23 | efried | dansmith: I don't know. What does the code do? Does it raise? | |
| 15:37:56 | efried | dansmith: I'm more asking for my edification, not suggesting the docs are inaccurate/inadequate. | |
| 15:38:33 | dansmith | efried: these functions migrate stuff, what they do and why they might be unable to migrate some records depends on what they're migrating | |
| 15:38:48 | dansmith | efried: if I'm migrating instances, I might refuse to touch instances with task_state!=None for example | |
| 15:39:15 | dansmith | efried: so I might say "there are 10 more instances to do, but I could only do 8" and then next I might say "there are 2 more to do but I could only do 0" | |
| 15:40:32 | mriedem | once done is 0 across the board, the CLI returns 0 and yo'ure done | |
| 15:40:58 | efried | dansmith: I guess I'm trying to understand whether there are cases where that means "the migration failed, push the red button and blow yourself up" or "go do XYZ manually" or "meh, don't worry about it, these things happen". | |
| 15:41:06 | mriedem | efried: if this helps https://review.openstack.org/#/c/574268/1/nova/cmd/manage.py@387 | |
| 15:41:57 | mriedem | return ran and 1 or 0 | |
| 15:41:59 | efried | mriedem: Right, that's the sentence that's prompting my question. "We've done all the ones we can do." So... what about the rest of them? | |
| 15:42:02 | mriedem | ran is based on done | |
| 15:42:12 | dansmith | mriedem: not really.. if done is zero it just means you're not able to do more work, but it doesn't mean everything is migrated | |
| 15:42:41 | dansmith | efried: it depends | |
| 15:43:00 | dansmith | efried: in my instance example, it means "try later once those instances are no longer transitioning state" | |
| 15:43:02 | mriedem | dansmith: then that's not clear from the command help https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/cli/nova-manage.html#nova-database | |
| 15:43:08 | mriedem | "Perform data migration to update all live data. Return exit code 0 if migrations were successful or exit code 1 for partial updates. This command should be called after upgrading database schema and nova services on all controller nodes. If the command exits with partial updates (exit code 1) the command will need to be called again." | |
| 15:43:35 | dansmith | mriedem: it's a minor loop vs. major loop type of thing | |
| 15:43:45 | mriedem | so, | |
| 15:43:47 | efried | ah, that indicates that (!0, 0) means "keep doing this until (0, 0)" | |
| 15:43:50 | dansmith | mriedem: nonzero means ansible should call again immediately.. zero means there's no more you can do right now | |
| 15:43:59 | dansmith | I can update those words too | |
| 15:44:02 | mriedem | it sounds like what you'd really need, if you were automating this, is rc=2 == total != 0, but done == 0 | |
| 15:44:30 | efried | no, it sounds like rc=1 means that already. | |
| 15:44:41 | mriedem | but rc=1 is only based on "done != 0" | |
| 15:44:54 | efried | oh, okay. So yeah. | |
| 15:44:58 | efried | what you said. | |
| 15:45:20 | dansmith | mriedem: we could, but anyone currently just checking for nonzero would get stuck, because it'd be changing what zero really means | |
| 15:45:23 | mriedem | otherwise if there is no other return code for the total != 0, done == 0 case, i can only know that by manually running things | |
| 15:45:41 | dansmith | early on in this, we didn't have migrations that couldn't complete fully, until we did, so.. | |
| 15:45:45 | mriedem | dansmith: sure, osa uses [0, 4] for things like that | |
| 15:46:00 | mriedem | i realize it would be backward incompatible, and upgrade release note, etc | |
| 15:46:14 | dansmith | mriedem: I don't know what that means | |
| 15:46:26 | mriedem | which part? | |
| 15:46:33 | dansmith | oh you mean [0,4] for either return value, sure, | |
| 15:46:36 | dansmith | but it has to change | |
| 15:46:40 | mriedem | right | |
| 15:46:56 | mriedem | if you're just saying != 0 in your tooling, that's kind of on you | |
| 15:47:06 | mriedem | anyway, i don't mean to open a can of worms | |
| 15:47:13 | dansmith | well, you did | |
| 15:47:16 | dansmith | worms. everywhere. | |
| 15:47:50 | dansmith | although efried is like the child that just starts throwing cans on the floor of the supermarket aisle | |
| 15:47:59 | dansmith | denting cans left and right until one opens | |
| 15:48:10 | efried | lol | |
| 15:48:20 | efried | like a child in my ignorance, at least. | |
| 15:48:51 | efried | My vote is that we merge this as is and (maybe) figure out what to do about that other thing later. | |
| 15:49:14 | mriedem | sure, throw a TODO in there about the rc=2 idea i guess | |
| 15:50:29 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Document the internal online_migrations function behaviors https://review.openstack.org/574268 | |
| 15:50:34 | mriedem | efried: can you double check https://review.openstack.org/#/c/486475/36/doc/source/admin/configuration/hypervisor-xen-api.rst and if i'm right, i'll update the patch for my comments and respin so we can flush it | |
| 15:50:53 | efried | ... | |
| 15:51:04 | mriedem | flush from the runways spot i mean | |
| 15:53:46 | efried | mriedem: You're right. History there was that they were going to switch the default, but I said nay. They wound it back, but missed a couple spots. Good eye. | |
| 15:54:01 | mriedem | ok, i figured that was the case | |
| 15:54:05 | mriedem | want to default to the new shiny | |
| 15:55:11 | efried | mriedem: Was I right to disallow that? | |
| 15:56:00 | mriedem | shrug | |
| 15:56:05 | mriedem | we do change defaults from time to time | |
| 15:56:21 | mriedem | if you were explicitly using the old thing, it's no upgrade issue, otherwise it is if you don't want that new default | |
| 15:56:30 | mriedem | but new installs get the new thing out of the box | |
| 15:56:37 | efried | mm | |
| 15:56:45 | openstackgerrit | Zack Cornelius proposed openstack/nova master: Refactor libvirt get_memory_used_mb() https://review.openstack.org/571030 | |
| 15:56:46 | openstackgerrit | Zack Cornelius proposed openstack/nova master: Implement file backed memory for instances in libvirt https://review.openstack.org/567876 | |
| 15:56:49 | mriedem | if the xenapi team wants the vdi_remote_stream stuff to be the default at some point, their docs should probably say something to that effect, like "this is the recommended image handler" | |
| 15:57:01 | mriedem | maybe direct is just the simplest / easiest to setup? | |
| 15:57:30 | efried | Well, reading back (PS29..34) it looks like it was more of an internal decision to revert the default. But I registered a not-having-liked-it comment too. | |
| 15:57:51 | efried | in any case, we're at not changing the default at this point, so your comment is apt. | |
| 16:00:35 | openstackgerrit | Jan Gutter proposed openstack/os-vif master: [WIP] Add support for generic offload representors https://review.openstack.org/572081 | |
| 16:00:59 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: XenAPI: define a new image handler to use vdi streaming https://review.openstack.org/486475 | |
| 16:01:00 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: XenAPI: update the document related to vdi streaming https://review.openstack.org/568444 | |
| 16:01:01 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: default [xenserver]/image_handler to vdi_remote_stream https://review.openstack.org/574318 | |
| 16:01:23 | mriedem | efried: ok i'll wait to +2 until that top test patch passes the 3rd party ci | |
| 16:01:46 | efried | mriedem: ack, poke me then and I'll +A | |
| 16:04:52 | mriedem | dansmith: on the consumer allocs patch, i think you were asking for this test https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567678/11/nova/tests/functional/api/openstack/placement/gabbits/ensure-consumer.yaml | |
| 16:05:03 | mriedem | creates an allocation at 1.7 so the consumer is auto-generated | |
| 16:05:06 | mriedem | using the conf | |
| 16:05:16 | dansmith | yup | |
| 16:05:57 | mriedem | ok +W | |
| 16:14:47 | openstackgerrit | Curt Moore proposed openstack/nova master: Add ability to download Glance images into the libvirt image cache via RBD https://review.openstack.org/574301 | |
| 16:15:33 | openstackgerrit | Curt Moore proposed openstack/nova master: Add ability to download Glance images into the libvirt image cache via RBD https://review.openstack.org/574301 | |
| 16:17:32 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix nits from change Id609789ef6b4a4c745550cde80dd49cabe03869a https://review.openstack.org/574324 | |
| 16:20:19 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Ensure resource class cache when listing usages https://review.openstack.org/574327 | |
| 16:20:37 | mriedem | dansmith: don't think i didn't see you give me that todo | |
| 16:57:34 | dansmith | mriedem: I was hoping you would notice :) | |
| 17:22:33 | mdbooth | mriedem: Saw your note about access_mode, but note that we're testing attach_mode. Started looking at cinder to see how robustly they're related but didn't finish. | |
| 17:26:46 | mriedem | there are likely glaring inconsistencies; access_mode is what comes back in the connection_info dict, | |
| 17:27:00 | mriedem | attach_mode is something on the attachment record itself, but you can't set it when creating or updating an attachment | |
| 17:27:05 | mriedem | https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/v3/#create-attachment | |