| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-11-03 | |||
| 01:10:04 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update compute API.get() stubs in test_serversV21 https://review.openstack.org/615342 | |
| 01:10:05 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update compute API.get() stubs for test_disk_config https://review.openstack.org/615345 | |
| 01:10:05 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update compute API.get() stubs for test_*security_groups https://review.openstack.org/615344 | |
| 01:10:06 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Drop pre-cellsv2 compat in compute API.get() https://review.openstack.org/615347 | |
| 01:10:06 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update compute API.get() stubs in test_access_ips https://review.openstack.org/615346 | |
| 01:10:07 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove "API Service Version" upgrade check https://review.openstack.org/615348 | |
| 01:50:49 | openstackgerrit | caoyuan proposed openstack/nova master: Update the description to make it more accuracy https://review.openstack.org/615362 | |
| 07:29:36 | openstackgerrit | Vieri proposed openstack/os-vif master: Update min tox version to 2.0 https://review.openstack.org/615046 | |
| 15:26:20 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova stable/rocky: Fix NoneType error in _notify_volume_usage_detach https://review.openstack.org/611326 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2018-11-04 | |||
| 06:21:58 | openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Imported Translations from Zanata https://review.openstack.org/614757 | |
| 13:22:49 | openstackgerrit | garyk proposed openstack/nova master: Improve metadata performance https://review.openstack.org/615435 | |
| 13:36:49 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Trivial: add reminder to update Tempest's scheduler_enabled_filters https://review.openstack.org/615436 | |
| 14:10:07 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: Add descriptions for vol-backed snapshots https://review.openstack.org/615084 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2018-11-05 | |||
| 01:54:39 | openstackgerrit | Joshua Cornutt proposed openstack/nova master: Added [key_pairs]/fingerprint_algorithm options https://review.openstack.org/615460 | |
| 01:56:07 | openstackgerrit | Joshua Cornutt proposed openstack/nova master: Added [key_pairs]/fingerprint_algorithm options https://review.openstack.org/615460 | |
| 06:23:14 | pvc | hi anyone successfully integrate cyborg to nova? | |
| 08:56:28 | bauzas | good morning stackers | |
| 09:06:11 | pvc | bauzas | |
| 09:06:15 | pvc | it is possible to implement cybrog to nova | |
| 09:10:14 | bauzas | it's a long story but some people try to do this | |
| 09:13:58 | jangutter | it's also unlikely to happen in the short term. | |
| 09:28:23 | johnthetubaguy | bauzas: just checking, partly for pvc, but I didn't think we had any code in place to integrate cyborg in master (yet)? Apart from maybe PCI pass-through? | |
| 09:31:21 | bauzas | johnthetubaguy: AFAIK, cyborg directly modifies nova.conf for using PCI passthru, yes | |
| 09:31:37 | johnthetubaguy | ah, got it, thanks | |
| 09:31:38 | bauzas | johnthetubaguy: there was a YVC session | |
| 09:32:15 | johnthetubaguy | yeah, I was more checking there wasn't post PTG progress I didn't know about while I was out of it | |
| 10:14:19 | openstackgerrit | Silvan Kaiser proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Added Qemu libquobyte Support to the Quobyte Driver https://review.openstack.org/546500 | |
| 10:41:51 | lpetrut | Hi, is it acceptable for exceptions to include another exception as message? Asking as exception_to_dict won't handle it properly: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/5859741f4d5e08ec15169b9c8d1aae1836442fd2/nova/compute/utils.py#L58-L87 | |
| 11:01:42 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Use links to placement docs in nova docs https://review.openstack.org/614056 | |
| 11:02:22 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove Placement API reference https://review.openstack.org/614437 | |
| 11:06:02 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Fix best_match() deprecation warning https://review.openstack.org/611204 | |
| 11:36:59 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: can you reivew https://review.openstack.org/#/c/610034/ | |
| 11:41:23 | adrianc | sean-k-mooney: Hi, i would like to co-author the following commits as i am now working towards aligning the POC code for libvirt sriov live migration: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/607365/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/607365/ | |
| 11:44:30 | sean-k-mooney | adrianc: hi yes that is fine feel free too. i have been held up with other work for the last 2 weeks so have not made much progress on this since then | |
| 11:44:56 | sean-k-mooney | im currently adressing stephens feedback on the spec but i should get that done today | |
| 11:45:12 | adrianc | great, thanks sean-k-mooney | |
| 12:29:08 | openstackgerrit | Lucian Petrut proposed openstack/nova master: Convert exception messages to strings https://review.openstack.org/615550 | |
| 12:54:24 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1801702 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Spawn may fail when cache=none on block device with logical block size > 512" [Undecided,New] | |
| 12:54:24 | aarents | Hi there, can someone may evaluate this issue: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1801702 | |
| 13:03:36 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: ack, will look | |
| 13:06:46 | Sundar | cdent: Please LMK when you have some time, regarding https://review.openstack.org/#/c/603955/ | |
| 13:07:50 | cdent | Sundar: I'm unlikely to have much time to talk synchronously, a lot going on, but if you leave questions and comments on the review I will respond as soon as I can | |
| 13:08:11 | cdent | but if it is something quick? | |
| 13:08:51 | Sundar | cdent: OK. I was hoping to get and provide clarification on the general comment: "In general it seems like the resources and representations thereof are too closely tied to the specific needs of the API" | |
| 13:09:11 | Sundar | I will respond in the review itself, as best as I can | |
| 13:09:13 | Sundar | Thanks | |
| 13:09:16 | cdent | thank you | |
| 13:28:03 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: +2d with a few nits | |
| 13:28:24 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: thanks ill check them out | |
| 13:46:00 | tssurya | melwitt: is there any reason on why we calculate the quota for instances/ram/cores per user per project ? (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/569055/2/nova/quota.py@1342), like do we practically use the counts for per user over projects anywhere ? | |
| 13:47:07 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: i belive we used to use the per user qoats in the past i assuemd we still do | |
| 13:47:44 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: we now do per project quotas right ? I am gessing only for keypairs we do per user ? | |
| 13:48:00 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: i was under the impression we had both | |
| 13:48:07 | tssurya | ah okay | |
| 13:48:15 | tssurya | let me check the documentation | |
| 13:48:29 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: personally i would consider it a fairly big regression if we drop the user quotas | |
| 13:49:08 | sean-k-mooney | it was not that uncommon for people to deploy one project per department/team in private cloude and then have a user level quota too | |
| 13:49:45 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: hmm correct looks like we have user quotas also heh, | |
| 13:50:12 | sean-k-mooney | so the test team project can have 100 instances but each tester can only have 10 personally | |
| 13:50:20 | tssurya | okay sounds fair enough that restricting resources on users also is valid | |
| 13:50:45 | sean-k-mooney | i dont know what the plans for this were with unified limits however | |
| 13:50:59 | sean-k-mooney | best to ask melwitt et al for comment | |
| 13:51:15 | tssurya | thanks sean-k-mooney , yea I don't know about tha unified limits stuff althought there is a spec worked upon by John | |
| 13:52:16 | johnthetubaguy | tssurya: currently the operator can specify per user limits, there are no plans to support this post unified limits | |
| 13:52:49 | johnthetubaguy | well basically, the plan is hierarchical limits replace that feature | |
| 13:52:51 | sean-k-mooney | johnthetubaguy: really | |
| 13:52:58 | tssurya | johnthetubaguy: ah thanks, so we are going to drop user quotas altogether ? | |
| 13:53:03 | leakypipes | johnthetubaguy: I'm getting close... | |
| 13:53:13 | johnthetubaguy | tssurya: that is what I propose in the spec and my patches, yeah | |
| 13:53:14 | leakypipes | johnthetubaguy: sigh, these quota unit test are ugly-as-f... | |
| 13:53:26 | sean-k-mooney | johnthetubaguy: so each user would have there own project in that case as a subproject of there teams project | |
| 13:53:30 | johnthetubaguy | leakypipes: not been in them yet! | |
| 13:53:32 | tssurya | johnthetubaguy: thanks I will go read the spec | |
| 13:53:51 | jaypipes | johnthetubaguy: bring a decanter of scotch. | |
| 13:53:54 | jaypipes | you'll need it. | |
| 13:54:05 | jaypipes | hopefully I'll have the worst of them cleaned up shortly. | |
| 13:54:22 | jaypipes | 9 failures left to fix (after converting them from test.TestCase to test.NoDBTestCase) | |
| 13:54:31 | johnthetubaguy | OK, nice | |
| 13:58:06 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: johnthetubaguy so has there been any push back on the fact that users with acess to multiple project will nolong have a global limit on the resouce that user can use | |
| 13:59:15 | sean-k-mooney | i know you can kindo of model that with per user project nested under a larger project but with only 2 levels of nesting that is not as flexible as what could be done before | |
| 13:59:39 | johnthetubaguy | sean-k-mooney: so I should be more precise, it was per user within a project, if my memory is correct | |
| 14:00:42 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: no, no pushback. | |
| 14:00:43 | johnthetubaguy | sean-k-mooney: the only users we know about, prefer and want to move to two level project quotas (they used the user thing as a workaround) | |
| 14:00:55 | sean-k-mooney | johnthetubaguy: wait could you have a per user qoat that was different form the users global quota for a specific porject before | |
| 14:00:57 | johnthetubaguy | yeah, the opposite, we have support for this direction | |
| 14:00:57 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: what johnthetubaguy said. | |
| 14:01:25 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: what's a "qoat"? Quota Of All Time? :) | |
| 14:01:33 | johnthetubaguy | sean-k-mooney: there was no global user quota, it was per user within a specific project. Maybe I answered tssurya's question badly | |
| 14:02:15 | sean-k-mooney | oh then i totally missunder stood how that option worked and always gave my team memebr more instance then i planned lol | |
| 14:03:01 | tssurya | johnthetubaguy: no I think you answered my question correctly. we currently support per user quota within projects, after unified limits we won't right ? | |
| 14:03:12 | johnthetubaguy | tssurya: yeah, that's right | |
| 14:03:31 | sean-k-mooney | i assumed the user quota applied across all project so when i gave them acess to a second project outside there main one i used the user quotat to limit there use of th unlimited project | |
| 14:03:54 | tssurya | yea so I guess sean-k-mooney was worried of this to be a big bad regression ? | |
| 14:04:00 | johnthetubaguy | tssurya: the folks who used that also modified policy so you couldn't delete someone elses instance, so its all a bit strange around those parts | |
| 14:04:33 | tssurya | johnthetubaguy: oh yea that is strange if its all in the same project | |
| 14:04:45 | johnthetubaguy | sean-k-mooney: yeah, I thought that too till I reviewed melwitt's patches, turns out it doesn't do that | |
| 14:04:45 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: from what johnthetubaguy and jaypipes explained there is no regression that i can see so all good | |
| 14:05:58 | sean-k-mooney | johnthetubaguy: well it was a private developer cloud so no harm in my case but ya | |
| 14:06:43 | sean-k-mooney | having to adjust both the project and user limits was always a bit of a pain so it soundls like its an improvment overall | |
| 14:06:54 | johnthetubaguy | cool | |