Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-10-18
09:59:00 sean-k-mooney no
09:59:43 jangutter sean-k-mooney: ah, I see what you mean. Rather than self-editing the object, return a new one with the filtered fields?
10:00:23 sean-k-mooney yes or rather host_info would retrun an unfiltered tree and then we would have a sperate filter function
10:01:03 sean-k-mooney the reason for this is i think we will want to have nova call host info and then filter by what the hypervior can support then serialser it and send it to neutron
10:01:09 jangutter sean-k-mooney: I had the same thought, it feels dirty to self-edit.
10:01:39 sean-k-mooney then neutron will want to filter it again and select a vif type from what is left
10:01:53 jangutter sean-k-mooney: filter should be a static function, not a member function.
10:03:25 sean-k-mooney ya proably it could be a class function that take steh tree as the second argument but a static fucntion would work just as well
10:03:28 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in unit/network/test_neutronv2.py (3) https://review.openstack.org/574104
10:03:47 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in unit/network/test_neutronv2.py (4) https://review.openstack.org/574106
10:04:02 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in unit/network/test_neutronv2.py (5) https://review.openstack.org/574110
10:05:15 jangutter sean-k-mooney: cool, will refactor the refilter.
10:06:12 sean-k-mooney :) cool the main issue is this part of the api was actully just a poc that was cerated without really thinking about how it would be used
10:09:28 jangutter sean-k-mooney: yep, and I realised while doing Jay's proposal for the offload metadata that if I don't work on this, it's going to result in another poor idiot thinking about this later.
10:12:09 sean-k-mooney jangutter: ya so this is all laying the ground work for doing the negciation likely in T
10:12:44 sean-k-mooney we could try and start it in Stein but i think that would be too tight to get the nova and neutron work done also
10:29:46 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Use oslo_db.sqlalchemy.test_fixtures https://review.openstack.org/609352
11:36:01 pooja_jadhav hi team, I have some doubt in the https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_tenant_usage.py#L135-L143.. In this they are trying to create 10 instances but when I have debug the code, I can see 20 istances. (1 instances repeated again). Can anyone guide me for the same?
11:54:03 openstackgerrit Martin Midolesov proposed openstack/nova master: Implementing graceful shutdown. https://review.openstack.org/608704
12:23:31 pooja_jadhav sean-k-mooney: Hi
12:23:49 sean-k-mooney jangutter: fyi your patch is still in the gate which is why the next patach has the -2 since its not merged yet
12:23:53 sean-k-mooney pooja_jadhav: hi
12:24:33 pooja_jadhav sean-k-mooney: I have some doubt in the https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_tenant_usage.py#L135-L143.. In this they are trying to create 10 instances but when I have debug the code, I can see 20 instances. (1 instances repeated again). Can you guide me for the same?
12:26:51 jangutter sean-k-mooney: I tried looking for any os-vif patches in the gate and it seemed to have silently disappeared.
12:27:07 sean-k-mooney looking at it. depending on what _fake_instance does it looks like this should create tenahts*servers fake instance objecst
12:27:55 sean-k-mooney jangutter: ok well its there now http://zuul.openstack.org/status if you put 611017 in the filter
12:28:26 sean-k-mooney sometimes it takes a minute for it to post back after it leaves the queue
12:29:32 sean-k-mooney pooja_jadhav: was there somthing in partcaller that you were confusted by regarding https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_tenant_usage.py#L135-L143
12:31:24 pooja_jadhav sean-k-mooney: sorry, I am not getting what u mean to say
12:32:09 sean-k-mooney pooja_jadhav: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_tenant_usage.py#L136-L143 is is construcint an InstanceList by initalisint the objects filed with a list comprehention
12:32:59 sean-k-mooney it is first calulating a rag by multipliying tenants by server then for each x in that range it is calling _fake_instance
12:33:07 pooja_jadhav sean-k-mooney: the issue i am facing like, I am creating 2 instances then in the simple tenant usage api should give me usgaes for that 2 instances only. but I can see 4 instance instead
12:34:01 pooja_jadhav correct
12:34:34 pooja_jadhav SERVERS = 5 and TENANTS = 2 (it should create 10 instances)
12:34:39 sean-k-mooney TENANTS and SERVERS are not paramaters to the function
12:34:41 pooja_jadhav correct?
12:34:43 sean-k-mooney yes
12:35:07 pooja_jadhav but when I see the instanceList, in that I can see 20 instances
12:35:25 pooja_jadhav 1 instance is repeating again (twice)
12:35:37 pooja_jadhav for the existing test cases only
12:36:04 sean-k-mooney can yo point me to a failing test?
12:36:18 pooja_jadhav test is not failing right now
12:36:36 pooja_jadhav actually, I am writting new test for simple tenant usage api for my fix
12:36:59 pooja_jadhav at that time, I was able to see this behaviour
12:38:07 pooja_jadhav ideally, if instance_list is giving 2 instances then for simple tenant usage should give usages for 2 instances only.
12:38:21 sean-k-mooney pooja_jadhav: can you push the fialing test case it would be eaier to debug it with logs
12:38:49 pooja_jadhav test is not failing
12:39:17 pooja_jadhav mriedem ^^
12:39:20 sean-k-mooney yes but it would be useful if i could see how you were using this fucntion
12:39:29 sean-k-mooney can you at leat past bin it somehwere
12:39:34 pooja_jadhav yes
12:40:13 sean-k-mooney fake_get_active_by_window_joined intally at least looks correct.
12:40:26 sean-k-mooney im wondering are you calling https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/unit/api/openstack/compute/test_simple_tenant_usage.py#L116-L132 somehow?
12:41:37 pooja_jadhav http://paste.openstack.org/show/732423/
12:42:44 pooja_jadhav I am using fake_get_active_by_window_joined() only not fake_get_active_deleted_flavorless()
12:49:26 sean-k-mooney pooja_jadhav: why are you patching a test function
12:49:58 pooja_jadhav means?
12:50:16 pooja_jadhav I am trying to add new test
12:50:37 sean-k-mooney sorry you are patching get_active_by_window_joined not fake_get_active_by_window_joined
12:50:52 pooja_jadhav hmm
12:51:54 pooja_jadhav I have mock this get_active_by_window_joined() and return_value set list of 2 instances (1 BFV and other is normal instance).
12:52:51 pooja_jadhav In the simple tenant usage API, in the instance_list I can see 4 instances and same in response dict after get API as well
12:52:53 sean-k-mooney yes so this is not using fake_get_active_by_window_joined at all
12:53:14 pooja_jadhav yes
12:54:02 sean-k-mooney what do you mean by the simple tenant api you can see 4 instances. you are working on unit test currectly so how can you see 4 instance when you dont have openstack running
12:54:52 pooja_jadhav in the unit test, I am calling index method
12:55:03 pooja_jadhav res_dict = self.controller.index(req)
12:58:18 sean-k-mooney right but why are you not mocking out _tenant_usages_for_period and the view builder funcitons
12:59:29 sean-k-mooney if you are wringing a unit test for index you should not be calling https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/simple_tenant_usage.py#L313 or https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/simple_tenant_usage.py#L322 within the test
12:59:34 pooja_jadhav but for existing tests as well, they are moacking these above functions
13:02:18 sean-k-mooney that is true that does not mean the exisiting test are well written.
13:06:30 sean-k-mooney pooja_jadhav: can you try using a patch decorator syntax instead of the with condetex manager
13:07:16 sean-k-mooney so precreate the expected dict before the test fuction and use @mock.patch('nova.objects.InstanceList.get_active_by_window_joined', expceted dicts)
13:08:07 sean-k-mooney actully never mind it should be identical
13:13:02 sean-k-mooney pooja_jadhav: am i dont have time to dig into this more right now sorry.
13:13:17 pooja_jadhav np
13:13:31 pooja_jadhav i will dig out :)
13:13:37 pooja_jadhav thanks for ur time
13:22:19 mriedem cfriesen: i have a buttload of questions in the tpm spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/571111/
13:23:00 mriedem mmedvede: any idea if emulated tpm is supported on pkvm? https://libvirt.org/formatdomain.html#elementsTpm
13:23:10 mriedem tonyb: ^
13:23:24 sean-k-mooney moshele: is the ci testing os-vif broken http://13.74.249.42/16/610916/4/check-os-vif/OVS_HW_offload/1c9af37/logs/n-cpu.service.log.gz
13:24:42 sean-k-mooney moshele: the failures seam to be related to looking up the represntors
13:24:57 moshele sean-k-mooney: we has some environment issues with, but it should be working now
13:25:14 moshele lennyb: right ^
13:26:36 sean-k-mooney i have approved https://review.openstack.org/#/c/611017 which is makeing a minior change to the unitiest code only and i was seeing this error.
13:27:24 sean-k-mooney the test change cannont cause this faiure so i am assuming this is an ci env issue.
13:29:13 moshele sean-k-mooney: I run recheck on the mellanox ci just to make sure it is working, if not I will talk to lennyb to fix it
13:30:38 sean-k-mooney moshele: cool i just wanted to reach out as i do check the result but i also dont block patches if the melonox ci fails and i can determin the failure was unrelated to the current patch as it is in this case
13:34:32 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: 'vcpus_total' doesn't reflect overcommit ratio https://review.openstack.org/611604
13:36:32 stephenfin jaypipes, mriedem: Would it ever make sense to remove the vcpus_used, vcpus_total from the hypervisor APIs, given that placement can do this stuff for us now? They're very misleading ^
13:38:52 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Update pypi url to new url https://review.openstack.org/582092
13:40:01 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Use assertRegex instead of assertRegexpMatches https://review.openstack.org/611608
13:43:21 lennyb moshele, sean-k-mooney I am rechecking the issue
13:45:04 mriedem stephenfin: we've talked about it, and at the last ptg too
13:45:10 mriedem or just have that API proxy to placement
13:47:41 stephenfin mriedem: This is the "What does shared storage provider support in nova give us? What does it fix?" section, I assume?
13:48:37 mriedem yes
13:49:05 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: perhaps. we did discuss it in the context of the local_gb field but we also disucssed should we just remove the hypervior api or as mriedem said make be a proxy to the relevent data from plancement in the future
13:49:41 stephenfin My next question was "I thought we don't do proxies any more", but I do vaguely recall a discussion about how this was special. Maybe that was something else though. Is it special?

Earlier   Later