| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-09-28 | |||
| 13:11:19 | mriedem | i can't keep track | |
| 13:13:26 | mriedem | johnthetubaguy: PapaOurs: while you're here, in case you haven't seen the thread, we're due to EM the ocata branch, | |
| 13:13:46 | mriedem | so i'm trying to flush through what ocata backports we have so we can do a final release before we tag the branch as EM, | |
| 13:13:52 | mriedem | which means we don't do releases of it after that point | |
| 13:13:57 | PapaOurs | gotcha | |
| 13:14:12 | mriedem | this will mean needing to flush the stuff in rocky/queens/pike first, since some of the ocata backports are also open on those other branches | |
| 13:14:26 | PapaOurs | I've seen a couple of changes in terms of relmgmt but I missed this one | |
| 13:14:27 | mriedem | i'll work on making an etherpad today and send something to the dev list, nova-specific, so we can burn that down next week | |
| 13:14:39 | PapaOurs | mriedem: good idea | |
| 13:14:40 | johnthetubaguy | mriedem: so that is end maintenance rather than extend maintenance? | |
| 13:15:00 | mriedem | johnthetubaguy: it just means we're allowed to let ocata rot at that point if we want | |
| 13:15:01 | PapaOurs | johnthetubaguy: it's basically the signal that we won't EOL but we won't also release | |
| 13:15:04 | mriedem | it's not in active maintenance | |
| 13:15:15 | johnthetubaguy | ah, got it | |
| 13:15:24 | mriedem | https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#extended-maintenance | |
| 13:15:50 | PapaOurs | mriedem: do we have some deadline for Ocata being EM ? | |
| 13:15:57 | PapaOurs | mriedem: trying to find the email you mention | |
| 13:16:58 | mriedem | https://releases.openstack.org/ | |
| 13:17:05 | mriedem | Extended Maintenance estimated 2018-08-27 | |
| 13:17:20 | PapaOurs | oh fun | |
| 13:17:21 | mriedem | like most things for stable, it's a guideline for the timeline, but we're always slow to get around to eol | |
| 13:17:35 | PapaOurs | I see, so the sooner is the better | |
| 13:17:51 | mriedem | well, the sooner we EM, the sooner we can stop caring as much about ocata | |
| 13:17:58 | mriedem | not that most people probably care that much about it right now | |
| 13:18:10 | PapaOurs | some people care, but they're paid to care :) | |
| 13:18:29 | mriedem | like jroll? | |
| 13:18:37 | mriedem | jroll: does oath even pick up fixes from upstream stable? | |
| 13:18:39 | PapaOurs | like above my shoulders | |
| 13:19:17 | jroll | mriedem: yes, we build our packages from latest upstream branch + patches | |
| 13:20:22 | PapaOurs | jroll: I guess you have downstream branches too ? | |
| 13:20:49 | PapaOurs | so, EM isn't really a problem for you, right? | |
| 13:20:54 | jroll | PapaOurs: we keep a repo of patches in `git format-patch` format that we apply, yes | |
| 13:20:56 | jroll | I mean | |
| 13:21:11 | jroll | we can handle it ourselves if ocata disappears | |
| 13:21:18 | PapaOurs | that's my point | |
| 13:21:24 | jroll | but we'd prefer to push any bugfixes back to share with others | |
| 13:21:38 | PapaOurs | or you can continue to feed the branch, if you will, that's the intent of EM | |
| 13:21:52 | PapaOurs | it's just that it becomes out of the nova-stable team control | |
| 13:22:09 | jroll | right | |
| 13:22:27 | jroll | PapaOurs: I can't tell if you're trying to answer a question or what? | |
| 13:22:33 | jroll | :) | |
| 13:22:39 | mdbooth | mriedem: Just looking at your comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/604400/. Did that job even get as far as running the evacuate test? | |
| 13:22:47 | mdbooth | Looks like it had tempest failures, no? | |
| 13:23:00 | mriedem | mdbooth: it did for the local storage/lvm phase | |
| 13:23:08 | mdbooth | Ah... | |
| 13:23:09 | PapaOurs | jroll: no, no, my point is that I don't see a reason why we should continue to have Ocata maintained by us upstream | |
| 13:23:25 | mriedem | then ceph + live migration failed b/c i don't think we bring one of the computes back up after the evacuate run in the first phase and wait for it to be ready before switching to ceph | |
| 13:23:35 | PapaOurs | jroll: so, even if people care of Ocata for various reasons, EM will still be there | |
| 13:23:43 | mdbooth | mriedem: K. I'll go look harder. | |
| 13:24:53 | jroll | PapaOurs: yeah, I don't think anyone is disagreeing there | |
| 13:25:56 | mdbooth | #echo '2. test with NFS for root + ephemeral disks' | |
| 13:25:56 | mdbooth | echo '2. NFS testing is skipped due to setup failures with Ubuntu 16.04' | |
| 13:26:00 | mdbooth | There's my nfs testing :) | |
| 13:43:16 | _ix | Good morning, folks. I'm trying to validate my openstack installation with tempest, and although my machines are instantiating more-or-less correctly, metadata fails to be verified: `http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/public-ipv4 is empty` | |
| 13:43:51 | _ix | On existing, functional machines, trying to access that same endpoint is indeed empty. Is there something I'm missing here? | |
| 13:48:47 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add hide server address tests in test_serversV21.py https://review.openstack.org/605435 | |
| 13:53:29 | mdbooth | dansmith: lazy load of a field from a deleted object? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/604400/5 | |
| 13:54:11 | mriedem | mdbooth: that's been fixed | |
| 13:54:23 | mriedem | well, something related to that has been fixed | |
| 13:54:56 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/instance.py#L900 | |
| 13:55:13 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/6ba8a35825a7ec839b2d0aab7559351d573130ab | |
| 13:55:19 | mriedem | but that's generic attributes, which flavor is not | |
| 13:55:41 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/instance.py#L958 | |
| 13:56:51 | mriedem | ah yup http://logs.openstack.org/00/604400/5/check/nova-live-migration/6aa7a4b/logs/subnode-2/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz#_Sep_26_23_53_06_475005 | |
| 13:57:32 | mriedem | mdbooth: good call | |
| 13:57:35 | mriedem | do we have a bug for that? | |
| 13:58:23 | mdbooth | mriedem: Haven't checked. I wrote that comment up in a panic as I'm about to be late for a meeting ;) | |
| 14:00:45 | mriedem | i'll look | |
| 14:00:54 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Null out instance.availability_zone on shelve offload https://review.openstack.org/606086 | |
| 14:03:56 | melwitt | . | |
| 14:06:16 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Send soft_delete from context manager https://review.openstack.org/476459 | |
| 14:07:37 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1794996 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "_destroy_evacuated_instances fails and kills n-cpu startup if lazy-loading flavor on a deleted instance" [High,Triaged] | |
| 14:07:37 | mriedem | https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1794996 | |
| 14:20:05 | jungleboyj | melwitt: You around? | |
| 14:20:16 | melwitt | jungleboyj: yes | |
| 14:20:22 | jungleboyj | melwitt: Morning! | |
| 14:20:25 | jungleboyj | Quetion for you. | |
| 14:20:30 | melwitt | gmorning | |
| 14:21:04 | jungleboyj | So, talking to a customer asking about being able to replicate instances between multiple data centers. | |
| 14:21:20 | jungleboyj | So, for DR, where if one DC goes down the other can just pick up. | |
| 14:21:35 | jungleboyj | melwitt: Nova doesn't currently have anything like that. Right? | |
| 14:22:27 | mriedem | jungleboyj: no | |
| 14:22:38 | mriedem | the root volume attach/detach blueprint is semi related though | |
| 14:22:55 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/600628/ | |
| 14:23:09 | mriedem | detach root volume from DC1, attach new root volume from DC2 | |
| 14:23:27 | melwitt | jungleboyj: you mean like some sort of instance HA? we don't have that. downstream, we have some kind of scripts that do something to handle the use case but I'm not too familiar with them | |
| 14:23:42 | jungleboyj | mriedem: Ok. | |
| 14:23:57 | mriedem | jungleboyj: kingbird is supposed to be related to this i think https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Kingbird in some way | |
| 14:24:05 | jungleboyj | melwitt: Ah, so there are ways to make it happen but nothing that is community developed? | |
| 14:24:12 | jungleboyj | Or supported by Nova? | |
| 14:24:35 | mriedem | and freezer? https://docs.openstack.org/freezer/latest/ | |
| 14:24:49 | mriedem | nova does not natively orchestrate DR | |
| 14:24:59 | mriedem | masakari deals with instance HA | |
| 14:25:10 | mriedem | freezer and kingbird are about backups/DR/replication i think | |
| 14:25:52 | jungleboyj | So that is what all those other projects are about. :-) | |
| 14:27:48 | jungleboyj | So, it looks like the answer is that there are projects out there working on this kind of problem. | |
| 14:28:53 | melwitt | jungleboyj: yeah, I mean, we've talked about this before and DR/HA would be best orchestrated outside of nova by another service/entity. and I wasn't familiar with the projects mriedem has mentioned ^ | |
| 14:29:13 | jungleboyj | melwitt: We both learned something. :-) | |
| 14:30:43 | melwitt | yep :) | |
| 14:35:09 | jungleboyj | mriedem: Thank you very much. Very helpful. | |