| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-12-05 | |||
| 22:59:11 | sean-k-mooney | oh actully | |
| 22:59:49 | sean-k-mooney | ok the usecase is compulte different to what i was expecte form the intro and problem descripteion | |
| 23:27:57 | sean-k-mooney | does blazer not use its specs repos | |
| 23:30:49 | sean-k-mooney | its in tree never mind | |
| 23:40:10 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1805984 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Placement is not aware of disable compute nodes" [Undecided,New] | |
| 23:40:10 | tssurya | mriedem: we have filed the bug already regarding placement not knowing about disabled computes: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1805984 | |
| 23:41:14 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: its not really a bug its a new feature that shoudl live in nova | |
| 23:41:26 | sean-k-mooney | well not quite | |
| 23:41:44 | sean-k-mooney | its not currently expected that placement would know | |
| 23:41:55 | sean-k-mooney | so its no a bug in that sence | |
| 23:49:44 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1708958 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "disabling a compute service does not disable the resource provider" [Wishlist,Won't fix] | |
| 23:49:44 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: right agreed its not a bug since it was decided as a won't fix on the placement side (https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1708958) | |
| 23:50:19 | tssurya | but mriedem wanted a bug (was replying to his ML post) | |
| 23:50:25 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: i set it to triage and wish list with the suggestion of converting to a spec or specless blueprint | |
| 23:50:28 | tssurya | to just track the issue | |
| 23:50:58 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: if it was neutron i would have just set the RFE tag on the bug but nova does not use that | |
| 23:51:24 | sean-k-mooney | its definetly an edge case an i can see it causeing issues for larger deployments | |
| 23:52:17 | sean-k-mooney | did you see the conversation we had on this an hour ago | |
| 23:56:08 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: was just scrolling back up to read it :D | |
| 23:56:25 | tssurya | I can see a couple of plausible solutions being proposed | |
| 23:56:42 | sean-k-mooney | yep there are 2 or 3 options | |
| 23:57:11 | tssurya | probably the one where reserved=total + disabling periodic updates on disabled computes to avoid overwrite is the better option | |
| 23:57:23 | sean-k-mooney | it looks like we should be able to come up with somethign | |
| 23:57:27 | tssurya | considering adding another periodic task just for this might be a overhead | |
| 23:57:32 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: im not sure about that | |
| 23:58:03 | sean-k-mooney | i guess we will see the traits approch or using a disabled aggreate seam like a clean solution | |
| 23:58:43 | tssurya | oh disabled aggregates! didn't see that part yet, reading now | |
| 23:59:53 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: well a disable aggreage is just an aggrage that we "nova" adds host that are down too and we jsut use the not member_of proposal to avoid | |
| #openstack-nova - 2018-12-06 | |||
| 00:00:49 | sean-k-mooney | specifcially use this feature https://review.openstack.org/#/c/603352/ | |
| 00:03:33 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: yea thanks, did read the full spec yet but got the idea | |
| 00:04:19 | tssurya | so it would be something like adding/removing to an aggregate when we disable/enable the service I guess | |
| 00:05:44 | tssurya | and the fourth solution was traits I see | |
| 00:05:45 | sean-k-mooney | yep and we then jsut alway include member_of=!<uuid of disbaled aggreage> | |
| 00:05:51 | sean-k-mooney | in the placement request | |
| 00:06:06 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: yep makes sense | |
| 00:06:21 | sean-k-mooney | we can use a uuid5 to generate a sable uuid for the aggragte but other services can create there own | |
| 00:07:58 | tssurya | yea, as long as the aggregate doesn't get stale (as in disruption during enable which fails to remove it from the aggregate)/we keep it in sync should work well. | |
| 00:08:12 | tssurya | which is a corner case | |
| 00:08:38 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: well we could take care of that with a periodic task to fix it | |
| 00:09:01 | sean-k-mooney | e.g we udate it imendiatly form the api but heal it later if the update got lost | |
| 00:09:49 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: after looking at the RT's periodic task, I am so down with periodic tasks as of now :D because of the overhead when having several computes | |
| 00:10:07 | tssurya | but yea as long as the interval is not so frequent, should be ok | |
| 00:10:17 | sean-k-mooney | haha ya but this would be on i guess the conductor | |
| 00:10:29 | sean-k-mooney | or supper conductor | |
| 00:11:17 | sean-k-mooney | the node status is in i think both the api and cell db so we dont need to run this on every compute node | |
| 00:11:42 | tssurya | node status is only in the cell db's | |
| 00:11:57 | sean-k-mooney | ok so but it could run on the cell conductor then | |
| 00:12:14 | tssurya | yea could be | |
| 00:12:40 | sean-k-mooney | an you could set the interval to a week if you wanted and this time supprot disabling it right out of the box by setting to 0 | |
| 00:13:06 | tssurya | but not sure if its an upcall when updating the api aggregate table frm the cell conductor but yea these are implementation details | |
| 00:13:11 | sean-k-mooney | if you trust it to not get out of sync our you will fix it later then no need to run it | |
| 00:13:50 | sean-k-mooney | tssurya: oh im talking about placemetn aggreagtes not nova host aggrats by the way | |
| 00:14:45 | tssurya | sean-k-mooney: oh okay! | |
| 00:15:05 | tssurya | since you saud "nova" adds hosts, got confused | |
| 00:15:34 | sean-k-mooney | ya i should have said nova update the placment aggragte with the compute node RP uuid | |
| 00:16:06 | tssurya | right yea | |
| 01:28:47 | jaypipes | cfriesen: you have awoken the kraken. but unfortunately, the kraken is too tired from playing tennis to fight tonight :) so, will chat tomorrow about it. | |
| 02:23:55 | openstackgerrit | Jack Ding proposed openstack/nova master: Preserve UEFI NVRAM variable store https://review.openstack.org/621646 | |
| 02:33:19 | openstackgerrit | Guo Jingyu proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposal for a safer noVNC console with password authentication https://review.openstack.org/623120 | |
| 02:44:30 | openstackgerrit | Guo Jingyu proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposal for a safer noVNC console with password authentication https://review.openstack.org/623120 | |
| 02:46:48 | openstackgerrit | Guo Jingyu proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposal for a safer noVNC console with password authentication https://review.openstack.org/623120 | |
| 02:51:53 | openstackgerrit | Guo Jingyu proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposal for a safer noVNC console with password authentication https://review.openstack.org/623120 | |
| 03:11:01 | openstackgerrit | Guo Jingyu proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposal for a safer noVNC console with password authentication https://review.openstack.org/623120 | |
| 03:26:36 | openstackgerrit | Zhenyu Zheng proposed openstack/nova master: Handle tags in _bury_in_cell0 https://review.openstack.org/621856 | |
| 03:43:55 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Add a bug tag for nova doc https://review.openstack.org/623130 | |
| 04:16:45 | openstackgerrit | Guo Jingyu proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposal for a safer noVNC console with password authentication https://review.openstack.org/623120 | |
| 04:52:18 | openstackgerrit | Guo Jingyu proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposal for a safer noVNC console with password authentication https://review.openstack.org/623120 | |
| 06:58:42 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: Body verification for the lock action https://review.openstack.org/622835 | |
| 07:00:32 | openstackgerrit | Zhenyu Zheng proposed openstack/nova master: Handle tags in _bury_in_cell0 https://review.openstack.org/621856 | |
| 07:41:25 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Update mailinglist from dev to discuss https://review.openstack.org/621827 | |
| 07:41:36 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: modify the avaliable link https://review.openstack.org/616905 | |
| 09:16:53 | gibi | stephenfin: regarding shorted notification payload, would you like to see the samples stored in nova sorted only or also the json emitted on the message bus? | |
| 09:23:39 | gibi | mdbooth: in the failure in nova.tests.functional.regressions.test_bug_1550919.LibvirtFlatEvacuateTest in http://logs.openstack.org/22/606122/7/check/nova-tox-functional/1f3126b/testr_results.html.gz there are 9 seconds gap between '[nova.virt.libvirt.driver] Creating image' and the first polling of the server state. So someting is definitely slow there _before_ even the test try to wait for 5 seconds | |
| 09:23:45 | gibi | to see the server is ACTIVE state | |
| 09:24:06 | mdbooth | gibi: looking | |
| 09:24:33 | mdbooth | gibi: That's one of the ones which looked 'generally unhappy' I think. | |
| 09:25:08 | gibi | mdbooth: unfortunately we dont have such timing data from successful runs :/ | |
| 09:26:14 | mdbooth | gibi: Or DEBUG logs :( | |
| 09:26:19 | gibi | does 'Creating image' means that in these test we really generate the root fs for the instance? | |
| 09:27:28 | mdbooth | gibi: No. The disk creation is stubbed to just touch the file. | |
| 09:27:58 | mdbooth | However, it does execute _resolve_driver_format in imagebackend, which executes qemu-img. | |
| 09:28:16 | mdbooth | I have a patch locally to mock that out, but on my unloaded system it doesn't make a massive difference. | |
| 09:28:46 | mdbooth | I can see that it's about 3 seconds of wall clock time, although multithreaded. | |
| 09:32:59 | gibi | mdbooth: I see. Honestly I don't know what could be the real problem. In the run http://logs.openstack.org/22/606122/7/check/nova-tox-functional/1f3126b/testr_results.html.gz I see missing DB table exceptions as well that reminds me the race we fixed with cdent last week in the placement db fixture. Maybe that race had other side effects. However we only fixed that in the split out placement repo. | |
| 09:34:05 | mdbooth | gibi: Like I said yesterday, I suspect it's just a canary: the first thing to die when conditions get bad. | |
| 09:34:30 | mdbooth | I could mock another couple of things out, and increase the timeout. | |
| 09:35:00 | gibi | mdbooth: could very well be it. Still it woul be nice to know why 5 seconds in not enough in these tests. But I know that we don't have data to figure that out | |
| 09:35:18 | mdbooth | gibi: Why don't we have debug enabled, btw? | |
| 09:36:09 | gibi | mdbooth: I'm not sure, maybe we don't want to store that much of logs. | |
| 09:37:13 | gibi | mdbooth: but if you can propose a patch that turns the debug log on, I can support that. and we will see if there are other oppinions | |
| 09:42:47 | gibi | stephenfin: I can try to propose the sorting patch and see if people start puking | |
| 09:43:03 | gibi | stephenfin: anyhow, thanks for the reviews on those patches | |
| 09:43:27 | mdbooth | gibi: Thanks for spending time on this. | |
| 09:43:50 | gibi | mdbooth: I mysteries :) | |
| 09:44:14 | mdbooth | Sometimes, anyway. | |
| 10:10:40 | yan0s | I have a question about nova policies | |
| 10:11:27 | yan0s | are variables "compute:create", "compute:get" etc deprecated? | |
| 10:12:08 | yan0s | I see they are not mentioned in the latest documentation | |
| 10:12:09 | yan0s | https://docs.openstack.org/nova/rocky/configuration/policy.html | |
| 10:13:15 | yan0s | also testing some of them I think they affect access rights | |