| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-12-17 | |||
| 15:18:46 | mriedem | spatel: you mean this? https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/cli/ | |
| 15:19:00 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1767315 in OpenStack Compute (nova) ""openstack hypervisor stats show" shows wrong memory information" [Undecided,Confirmed] - Assigned to jichenjc (jichenjc) | |
| 15:19:00 | sean-k-mooney | actully this bug has an example https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1767315 | |
| 15:19:01 | gibi | mriedem: FYI I sneaked in one more patch to the bandwidth runway slot (handling detach interface) and added a note that the rest of the patches in the series are part of a not completed subfeature | |
| 15:19:12 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: also i think i should close that bug ^ | |
| 15:20:15 | spatel | sean-k-mooney: yes but i didn't find any packet which provide nova-manager command | |
| 15:20:52 | sean-k-mooney | spatel: nova-manage should generally not be used unless you are upgrading | |
| 15:21:01 | sean-k-mooney | there are a few maintance ops | |
| 15:21:05 | mriedem | or installing... | |
| 15:21:20 | mriedem | spatel: where you get the cli is up to the packages/distro you're using | |
| 15:21:22 | spatel | unless is upgrading? | |
| 15:21:23 | mriedem | that's not really a nova question | |
| 15:21:44 | sean-k-mooney | well yes installing too but it should not be used for debuging | |
| 15:22:26 | sean-k-mooney | spatel: oh sorry i taught we were still taking about vm count | |
| 15:22:35 | spatel | yes.. its not nova question but i was just wonder all documents pointing to use nova-manager and i didn't find that command anywhere or any openstack deployment.. | |
| 15:22:58 | sean-k-mooney | spatel: it should be installed when you install nova | |
| 15:23:58 | sean-k-mooney | spatel: its a console-script that is generated by setuptools/pbr https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/setup.cfg#L66 | |
| 15:24:04 | spatel | its no there.. i have installed all nova utility tools but didn't find that tool | |
| 15:24:31 | sean-k-mooney | spatel: on what distro? | |
| 15:24:37 | spatel | CentOS 7.5 | |
| 15:24:51 | spatel | Installation method is Openstack-ansible | |
| 15:25:18 | sean-k-mooney | openstack ansible installs form source right? | |
| 15:25:28 | sean-k-mooney | or are you using nova form the distro rpms | |
| 15:25:29 | spatel | yes they use source | |
| 15:25:48 | sean-k-mooney | then when osa did pip install nova it should have been genreated | |
| 15:25:50 | spatel | openstack-ansible use source from git repo, they don't use RPM | |
| 15:26:09 | sean-k-mooney | spatel: without it they would not have been able to create the nova db and could not run the db migrations | |
| 15:26:17 | spatel | Let me ask openstack-ansible channel and see if they offer any suggestion | |
| 15:27:05 | odyssey4me | spatel nova-manage is in the nova venv, as with all the openstack packages we build | |
| 15:27:21 | spatel | there you are!! | |
| 15:27:26 | odyssey4me | so it'll be /openstack/venvs/nova-<tag>/bin/nova-manage ... | |
| 15:28:24 | spatel | odyssey4me: so that command won't be available in utility container right? | |
| 15:28:39 | odyssey4me | spatel nope, it'll only be on hosts where the nova service is installed | |
| 15:29:06 | spatel | odyssey4me: thank for clarification | |
| 15:29:15 | odyssey4me | it requires database access, so best is to use it from the control plane hosts - compute may not have the db connection string in nova.conf | |
| 15:29:20 | mriedem | gibi: in reading the spec, it looks like we need to handle cleaning up bw allocations when a port is detached - do you have code for that up yet? | |
| 15:29:43 | mriedem | gibi: because it seems we'd want that code in place first, which would be a noop until the server create code lands, right? | |
| 15:29:45 | gibi | mriedem: that is the patch I've just sneak into the list | |
| 15:29:54 | odyssey4me | spatel no problem - happy to assist :) | |
| 15:30:07 | gibi | mriedem: hm regarding the ordering you are right | |
| 15:30:54 | mriedem | also, why aren't the "reject ports with qos" patches first in the series? | |
| 15:30:58 | gibi | mriedem: so this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622421/6 needs to be earlier in the stack | |
| 15:31:14 | mriedem | i'm just trying to think of the order in which this rolls out, | |
| 15:31:34 | mriedem | where the groundwork is done first so that when the scheduler bits are turned "on" the rest of it is in place | |
| 15:31:49 | mriedem | sort of like how we handle adding new api features which require changes to compute | |
| 15:31:53 | mriedem | we start from the bottom up | |
| 15:33:54 | gibi | mriedem: the API bit here is the neturon API extension that adds the resource_request field to the port | |
| 15:33:59 | mriedem | as of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567268/ will we be allocating bw resources during server create? | |
| 15:34:09 | gibi | mriedem: if that field is not there then nothing happens in nova | |
| 15:34:34 | mriedem | this right? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567268/36/nova/network/neutronv2/api.py | |
| 15:35:05 | openstackgerrit | Jack Ding proposed openstack/nova master: Preserve UEFI NVRAM variable store https://review.openstack.org/621646 | |
| 15:36:36 | mriedem | yeah and that's used here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567268/36/nova/scheduler/utils.py | |
| 15:36:38 | gibi | mriedem: yes. and that data ends up in the RequestSpec here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567268/36/nova/compute/api.py@884 which leads to bandwidth allocations | |
| 15:36:44 | mriedem | to build the resource request to allocation candidates | |
| 15:36:59 | gibi | mriedem: yes | |
| 15:37:41 | mriedem | so if we were to merge the first patch in the series, we'd be allocating these things on server create, but not handling them for moves, or port detach | |
| 15:38:20 | yan0s | if I want to have the same set of flavors in two Regions | |
| 15:38:30 | mriedem | gibi: i kind of see two options, neither of which is probably great for you: | |
| 15:38:36 | yan0s | do I need to duplicate them in both Regions? | |
| 15:38:52 | yan0s | or is there another solution for them to exist in just one place? | |
| 15:38:53 | mriedem | 1. re-order the series so the bottom-up changes (nova-compute) happens first and we build to the top where the api transfers the port request to the scheduler | |
| 15:39:31 | mriedem | 2. we don't merge the bottom changes in the series until we're happy with the whole thing, at which point we approve it all and hope it merges in the same day/week | |
| 15:40:20 | gibi | mriedem: there is one catch. Unitl https://review.openstack.org/#/c/590363/27/neutron/services/qos/qos_plugin.py@128 merges there is no resource_request field in the neutron ports. And after that patch merges there is still a manual step to enable the neutron port extension to turn on the whole feature | |
| 15:40:22 | mriedem | yan0s: does nova-api span regions? | |
| 15:41:07 | mriedem | gibi: is there a nova change which depends on that neutron change? | |
| 15:41:20 | yan0s | I'm still just in theory about it | |
| 15:41:21 | mriedem | i would think https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567268/ should depend on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/590363/ | |
| 15:41:39 | gibi | mriedem: no direct dependency as if there is no code that fails if the resource_request is missing | |
| 15:41:58 | mriedem | sure, but it's a functional dependency | |
| 15:41:59 | yan0s | What do you mean by that? | |
| 15:42:17 | yan0s | HA deployment of nova-api? | |
| 15:42:22 | mriedem | yan0s: your question depends on if you have separate nova deployments (separate api endpoints) per region | |
| 15:42:25 | gibi | mriedem: the neutron api extension that introduces resource_request is lik a feature flag for the whole bandwidth series | |
| 15:42:25 | yan0s | over the 2 regions? | |
| 15:42:47 | gibi | mriedem: I can make a depends-on to the neutron patch, that is easy | |
| 15:42:51 | mriedem | if you have separate compute api endpoints per region, using isolated dbs, then yes you'd need to duplicate across regions (i think that's what project kingbird is for) | |
| 15:43:08 | gibi | mriedem: what I'd like to achive is to consider the neutron api extension as a feature flag | |
| 15:43:11 | mriedem | gibi: so what do you think about the 1 or 2 options above? | |
| 15:43:53 | mriedem | personally i'd like to merge some stuff to see it continue moving, but i probably won't do that while the control-plane changes are coming before the backend nova-compute changes to handle cleaning up | |
| 15:44:11 | mriedem | which just means you'd be dealing with merge conflicts longer... | |
| 15:44:17 | gibi | mriedem: I'd like to propose 3.: the neutron api extension is marked experimental till a good set of usecases are covered by the code merges. | |
| 15:45:09 | yan0s | I think, since my regions are going to be in the same DC, the best option will be to have one nova-api | |
| 15:45:15 | gibi | mriedem: if that doesn't work for you, then I can move the reject cases and the detach case to the front of the series | |
| 15:45:58 | gibi | mriedem: detach might not work when moved to the front so I might need to reject detach until some create logic merges | |
| 15:46:03 | mriedem | gibi: it might work. i'll just finish reading the spec again, start going through the nova changes and +1 if i'm cool with a change and we'll see where it goes from there once i have the whole thing in my head | |
| 15:46:47 | yan0s | could you point to me some documentation on same nova-api region deployment? | |
| 15:47:00 | gibi | mriedem: I will run an experiment locally to see how hard is the re-arrange | |
| 15:47:23 | gibi | mriedem: will not push anyting before we sync | |
| 15:50:29 | mriedem | yan0s: i'm aware of https://docs.openstack.org/operations-guide/ops-capacity-planning-scaling.html#segregating-your-cloud but it's old | |
| 15:50:42 | mriedem | https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Kingbird | |
| 15:51:30 | mriedem | yan0s: note the cells mention in that ops guide is about cells v1, which is deprecated and replaced with cells v2 in nova which is not experimental nor optional - all nova deployments since ocata are by default a cells v2 cell of 1 | |
| 15:53:58 | yan0s | mriedem: thanks! | |
| 15:55:03 | yan0s | so shared nova-api means using cells instead of regions | |
| 15:55:05 | yan0s | correct | |
| 15:55:06 | yan0s | ? | |
| 15:55:09 | mriedem | yes | |
| 16:01:20 | mriedem | https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2004625 if anyone wants to cleanup the 'cells' reference in the old ops scaling guide | |
| 16:01:49 | gibi | mriedem: if we want to go with good order that means either I cannot allow booting an instance with bandwidth until nova supports migrate, evacuate, unshelve for that instance, or reject migrate, evacuate, unshelve, for that instance | |
| 16:02:03 | yan0s | So choosing in which region to launch a VM is a matter of using this regions API | |
| 16:02:11 | gibi | mriedem: neither looks really good to me :/ | |