Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-09-27
14:41:20 mriedem we just pass an empty list to ComputeNodeList.get_by_uuids() which returns an empty list and passes that down to the filter scheduler driver which then raises NoValidHost
14:41:54 mriedem oh i guess we log something at debug,
14:41:58 mriedem but that won't be indexed by logstash
14:42:14 mnaser yeah we dont do that, too much data
14:42:20 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/manager.py#L150
14:42:32 bauzas mnaser: yup, we do http://logs.openstack.org/72/585672/7/check/tempest-full-py3/f1d0b34/controller/logs/screen-n-sch.txt.gz#_Sep_26_19_02_54_285546
14:42:59 mriedem mnaser: do you have a failure log to check?
14:43:03 mriedem placement should be logging some stuff now too
14:43:16 mnaser mriedem: i might if it hasnt rotated out
14:43:24 bauzas mriedem: see, we put an info log on how many hosts we got from placement ^
14:43:31 mriedem as to which "filters" in placement resulted in 0 allocation candidates
14:43:43 mriedem Sep 26 19:02:54.285546 ubuntu-xenial-rax-ord-0002338068 nova-scheduler[18720]: DEBUG nova.filters [None req-8a6074ae-e62f-4ac7-a525-4c411c130c39 tempest-AutoAllocateNetworkTest-2112321998 tempest-AutoAllocateNetworkTest-2112321998] Starting with 1 host(s) {{(pid=20232) get_filtered_objects /opt/stack/nova/nova/filters.py:70}}
14:43:45 bauzas oh shit, that's DEBUG
14:43:47 mnaser yeah
14:43:47 mnaser mriedem: that is a LOG.debug() so a normal deployment wont see it
14:43:50 mriedem right
14:43:51 bauzas my bad
14:43:54 mriedem GAWD!
14:44:13 mnaser i think it's useful to get that warning because a lot of times when placement isnt returning anything
14:44:15 bauzas we info out when we have the filtering results
14:44:16 mnaser i would get really confused
14:44:19 mriedem logging https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/manager.py#L150 at INFO might be ok
14:44:26 mnaser yeah but we don't even pass things down to filter
14:44:29 bauzas WTF
14:44:30 mnaser if we get 0 allocation candidates
14:44:39 mnaser if i understand what mriedem linked above
14:44:42 bauzas that's correct
14:44:50 bauzas we just said "meh, that's bad"
14:45:11 bauzas my point was, if we end up with 0 hosts from filtering, some INFO log is done
14:45:30 mnaser yeah that scenario is taken care of i agree
14:45:30 bauzas so, having the pre-filtering result to be INFO seems consistent and valid to me
14:45:44 bauzas lemme dig the code
14:45:47 mnaser i'd even go as far as say that's a warning
14:45:56 mnaser https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/manager.py#L150 -- just switch that to warning ?
14:46:11 bauzas but I'm pretty sure we say it's INFO (and no ERROR or warning, because a capacity problem isn't a scheduling problem)
14:46:29 mnaser "change debug level for more info"
14:46:31 bauzas mnaser: I'd advocate for INFO
14:46:36 bauzas no WARN
14:46:48 mnaser it would be consistent with the other stuff
14:46:52 bauzas lemme find the existing log we raise post-filtering
14:46:53 mriedem bauzas: unrelated, but is it just me or do we persist RequestSpec.requested_destination?
14:46:57 mriedem and probably shouldn't...
14:47:03 mnaser bauzas: its info, i have an entry here
14:47:23 mnaser bauzas: 2018-09-27 12:37:00.467 394218 INFO nova.filters [<snip>] Filter ComputeFilter returned 0 hosts
14:47:23 bauzas mriedem: wait, wait wait
14:47:31 mriedem mnaser: i'd say info
14:47:39 bauzas mriedem: probably yet another PEBKAC then
14:47:41 mriedem it's not a warning if someone is trying to resize to a flavor that won't fit anywhere
14:47:48 bauzas (for the persisted field)
14:47:53 bauzas mriedem: zactly
14:47:59 bauzas (16:46:11) bauzas: but I'm pretty sure we say it's INFO (and no ERROR or warning, because a capacity problem isn't a scheduling problem)
14:48:28 bauzas gosh, already 4:46pm here :(
14:48:48 mriedem so if we do persist the request spec requested_destination, i'm just not sure how it doesn't cause problems
14:49:52 mriedem maybe we just get lucky and don't call request_spec.save() on the dirty request spec?
14:50:16 mnaser would we be able to backport that log level change? it's kinda useful. if we can i guess i'll file a bug?
14:50:30 mriedem mnaser: sure
14:51:01 bauzas mriedem: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/request_spec.py#L29
14:51:37 mriedem bauzas: that doesn't really tell me anything
14:51:38 bauzas and shit, I threw my day on some internal bug and now I'm done, I have to go into a meeting
14:52:32 mriedem mnaser: this is your justification https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/c6218428e9b29a2c52808ec7d27b4b21aadc0299/nova/filters.py#L130
14:52:46 mriedem b/c if we got allocation candidates, but the filters rejected all of them, we log something at INFO
14:53:25 mriedem http://logstash.openstack.org/#dashboard/file/logstash.json?query=message%3A%5C%22Filtering%20removed%20all%20hosts%20for%20the%20request%20with%5C%22%20AND%20tags%3A%5C%22screen-n-sch.txt%5C%22&from=7d
14:54:28 bauzas mriedem: I guess I have to doublecheck this spaghetti code
14:55:06 bauzas mriedem: but since requested_destination is only set on a live migration or an evacuation, I just wonder whether we .save() this
14:55:45 mriedem it's also set on resize
14:55:52 mriedem b/c you can pass a host on resize since queens
14:56:04 mriedem and on resize we persist the request spec with the new flavor before casting to compute
14:56:14 mriedem i'm pretty sure i raised this with takashi when he was writing that
14:56:54 bauzas ah
14:56:55 mriedem ah this is how he dealt with that https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/api.py#L3505
14:56:56 bauzas ghood point
14:57:15 bauzas anyway, I need to jump on a call
14:57:17 mriedem but....that's likely not good enough if you resize to a specific host, and then live migrate without specifying a host...
14:57:51 bauzas mriedem: live migrate has the same logic IIRC
14:58:00 bauzas we null out the field
14:58:26 mriedem i don't see that happening
14:58:28 mriedem for live migrate
14:58:36 bauzas oh shit no you're right
14:58:43 bauzas bug bug bug
14:58:48 openstackgerrit Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/nova master: Use INFO for logging no allocation candidates https://review.openstack.org/605765
14:58:58 mnaser mriedem: bauzas ^
14:59:07 mnaser took me longer to come up with a decent commit message jeez
14:59:39 melwitt .
15:00:10 mriedem bauzas: i'll give myself a todo to write a regression test for this
15:00:23 bauzas mriedem: ack
15:01:06 mriedem mnaser: +2
15:01:54 openstackgerrit Christoph Manns proposed openstack/nova master: Fix stacktraces with redis caching backend https://review.openstack.org/605748
15:01:59 bauzas mnaser: +Wipped
15:02:15 bauzas mnaser: please make a cherry-pick for rocky
15:06:58 openstackgerrit Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Use INFO for logging no allocation candidates https://review.openstack.org/605771
15:07:09 mnaser bauzas: done
15:26:53 mnaser AggregateRamFilter is still relevant and working? i remember there was an aggregate filter that had a long ml discussion about how it wasnt really working?
15:28:14 mriedem mnaser: ask jaypipes re https://review.openstack.org/#/c/544683/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552105/
15:38:06 melwitt mnaser: this is the situation http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-January/126283.html and it's still the case now. those two specs ^ are what's needed to restore the ability to set allocation ratios per aggregate
15:41:14 openstackgerrit Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Ignore forcing of live migration for nested instance https://review.openstack.org/605785
15:41:33 gibi mriedem: my first stab for ignoring the force flag ^^
15:42:24 mgagne @mriedem: what's up with caching scheduler?
15:42:31 mriedem mgagne: are we ok to remove it now?
15:42:32 mriedem in stein
15:43:01 mnaser melwitt: i see, i think i might be looking at the wrong filter then

Earlier   Later