| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-01-21 | |||
| 13:17:14 | sean-k-mooney | actully i guess that is just a convention | |
| 13:17:26 | sean-k-mooney | it will actully be called test_dev_9 | |
| 13:17:29 | sean-k-mooney | ok | |
| 13:17:49 | ralonsoh | sean-k-mooney, well yes, and the same in test_add_vlan | |
| 13:18:38 | sean-k-mooney | ya if we were using ifconfig the dev.vlan name would be required i think but since we are using ip link to create them we are free to call them whatever we like | |
| 13:21:58 | sean-k-mooney | ill need to resping the change to the release repo so ill pick up the 4 patch in that chain when i do for the 1.14.0 release | |
| 13:24:38 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: are you to quckly review some os-vif changes. im +2 on all of them but could you take a look at them https://review.openstack.org/#/c/631829/3 | |
| 13:24:51 | sean-k-mooney | *are you free | |
| 13:40:25 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/os-resource-classes master: Add PCPU standard resource class https://review.openstack.org/631711 | |
| 13:52:14 | edleafe | I know we skipped one conference; can't remember which | |
| 13:52:32 | edleafe | wrong window | |
| 13:55:46 | efried | n-sch meeting in 5 minutes in #openstack-meeting-alt. Expect it to be a short one. | |
| 14:03:26 | openstackgerrit | Natal Ngétal proposed openstack/nova master: [Configuration] Clean up .gitignore references to personal tools https://review.openstack.org/632086 | |
| 14:37:50 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: thanks for the +w i forgot stephenfin is on PTO today | |
| 14:38:41 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: no problemo. | |
| 14:46:32 | gibi | mriedem: hi, I see that jaypipes already +2 the ensure consumer status check but I have a question in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/631671/7/placement/cmd/status.py@51 | |
| 14:49:20 | mriedem | gibi: so a consumer record for allocations but no generation? | |
| 14:49:24 | mriedem | i don't think that's possible... | |
| 14:49:34 | mriedem | the consumer generation would start at 0 if it's new | |
| 14:50:12 | gibi | mriedem: based on your docstring I felt that you wanted to detect this case as well with the query but I don't think that the current query detects that | |
| 14:50:31 | mriedem | the consumers table defaults generation to 0 so as long as there is a consumers table record, i think it has a generation | |
| 14:50:55 | gibi | mriedem: OK, then I just overreacted. thanks for the explanation | |
| 14:51:09 | mriedem | np | |
| 14:52:50 | mriedem | gibi: while you're here, and you've been on the per-aggregate weights patch, i had a usage/behavior question about one of the weighers which you might have an opinion https://review.openstack.org/#/c/628163/12/nova/tests/unit/scheduler/weights/test_weights_compute.py@95 | |
| 14:54:30 | mriedem | i'd ask dan but he's out this week | |
| 14:57:02 | mriedem | stephenfin: easy cleanup patch on which you have context https://review.openstack.org/#/c/628205/ | |
| 14:57:36 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: stephenfin is on PTO today he will be back tomorrow | |
| 14:58:28 | mriedem | ah yes MLK day in ireland... | |
| 14:58:46 | sean-k-mooney | no he just took today off | |
| 14:58:56 | sean-k-mooney | i think he was at a gig over the weekend or something | |
| 15:00:38 | gibi | mriedem: looking... | |
| 15:01:29 | sean-k-mooney | actully he may been skying the cleanups make sense to me. | |
| 15:04:15 | gibi | mriedem: I tend to agree to simply document that min in case of build_failure weigher means the min of the configured weights not the calculated (and negated) weights | |
| 15:13:02 | mriedem | gibi: ok so you wouldn't change anything about the docs here? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/628163/13/doc/source/user/filter-scheduler.rst@508 | |
| 15:13:28 | mriedem | i had started commenting on that about whether or not we should mention something about that, or give an example, but when i read what i'd add it just makes it more confusing | |
| 15:15:59 | mriedem | i left a comment that i can't come up with a good comment, +2 | |
| 15:19:11 | gibi | mriedem: I think that doc is correct from external perspective | |
| 15:19:41 | gibi | mriedem: and I agree configuring weighers are hard, and this patch now makes it even more complex | |
| 15:20:37 | mriedem | heh | |
| 15:20:48 | mriedem | time for edleafe's scheduler dry run API | |
| 15:21:17 | gibi | is it a test environment for scheduler config? :) | |
| 15:23:36 | edleafe | gibi: the idea was to pass in a request and some target hosts, and have the scheduler return the hosts that would have passed, but not actually build anything on those hosts | |
| 15:24:32 | edleafe | It would have been useful for the Watcher project to know if they try to move an instance to a host whether the new host was a valid target | |
| 15:25:44 | gibi | edleafe: I see. It is interesting | |
| 15:26:28 | edleafe | gibi: now what they do is try to move it and catch the failure. It's slow and expensive | |
| 15:28:03 | cdent | I am slow and expensive | |
| 15:30:25 | openstackgerrit | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: docs: Update references to "QEMU-native TLS" document https://review.openstack.org/631283 | |
| 15:30:25 | openstackgerrit | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: A few miscellaneous items related to "native TLS" https://review.openstack.org/630980 | |
| 15:35:33 | gibi | edleafe: in return, such a dryrun might return True for a host but then the actual scheduling will fail a due to races | |
| 15:35:43 | gibi | edleafe: but I see that this is a tradeoff | |
| 15:37:45 | edleafe | gibi: sure, that's always been understood, and things like total available resources are already able to be known. What it *would* do is help with things like affinity/anti-affinity, aggs, etc., that are pure nova-isms | |
| 15:38:07 | gibi | edleafe: yeah, make sense | |
| 16:12:22 | gibi | mriedem: btw, as dansmith is on vacation, I | |
| 16:12:39 | gibi | mriedem: btw, as dansmith is on vacation, I'd like to ask your oppinion on my answer in the bandwidth ML thread | |
| 16:12:59 | gibi | mriedem: of course if your oppinion is to wait for dansmith then I will wiat | |
| 16:13:02 | gibi | wait | |
| 16:14:56 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: by the way i was not arguing that all features reqire move support just that numa is not a good example :) | |
| 16:15:20 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yeah. I could use other example like virt driver support for certain operations | |
| 16:15:47 | sean-k-mooney | yep ironic does not really have much of a choice | |
| 16:17:11 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: speaking of ironic i assume there is noting in pricipal stopping bw based schduling from being extended to ironic if the appropriate ml2 drivers were extended | |
| 16:17:39 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yes and no. From nova perspective nothing prevents ironic to handle bandwidth | |
| 16:17:54 | sean-k-mooney | you would just need to update the ml2 drivers for the tor switch | |
| 16:17:56 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: from neutron perspective I'm not sure bandwidht allocation can be enforced | |
| 16:18:23 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: if you use the tor for it then it is not the same bandwidth as in case of libvirt and sriov | |
| 16:18:42 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: yes and no | |
| 16:19:02 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: in theory we can extend the current bandwidth support for the tor switch in in case of libvirt + sriov | |
| 16:19:37 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: well for the libvirt case to include the tor means hierarcical port binding | |
| 16:19:53 | sean-k-mooney | but for ironic the tor is the l1 port binding | |
| 16:20:11 | sean-k-mooney | anyway that is for the future | |
| 16:20:21 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yes :) | |
| 16:22:03 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: my problem with dansmith mail is that I thought that microversion can be used to signal a new, supported use case, if the change affect an API behavior. But from the mail it seems that is only true for complete feature | |
| 16:22:08 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: PCI/SRIOV question for you. with the upstream code, how do you ensure that an instance that requests a PCI NIC ends up on a compute node that has physical NICs on the desired physical network? Is that just host aggregates? As I recall, the network-aware scheduling stuff never landed. | |
| 16:22:49 | sean-k-mooney | the pci filter performs that check | |
| 16:23:13 | sean-k-mooney | in the whitelist we declare the physnet that the pf is connected too | |
| 16:23:39 | mriedem | gibi: for supporting numa live migration, i don't think a microversion was going to be added - today it just fails (might be a 400, i'd have to look), | |
| 16:24:36 | mriedem | i see both sides and i think the argument for not adding a microversion for move support is to avoid the ux mess of being able to create a server with one microversion but then you have to use another to do something with it | |
| 16:24:38 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: the network aware schdulling stuff was for offloads. idealy we would do this with placement rather then the pcipassthough filter | |
| 16:25:00 | mriedem | i guess that argument could be made for something like volume-backed rebuild as well | |
| 16:25:21 | mriedem | you can create a volume-backed server with 2.1 but can't rebuild and re-image the root volume without a new microversion | |
| 16:25:28 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: whenever we get around to modeling PFs/VFs in placemetn we could use either placement aggrates or traits to model physnets | |
| 16:25:51 | mriedem | gibi: anyway, if we don't have move support in stein anyway, then the microversion for move is a train discussion and we can defer until then can't we? | |
| 16:25:55 | gibi | mriedem: so in this case discoverability is less important here than ux microversion usage | |
| 16:26:32 | mriedem | unless the argument is being made that we shouldn't ship the create support in stein unless move support is also ready...which i don't think we should do (and that argument could be made about a lot of features we add, like vgpus and trusted certs) | |
| 16:27:00 | mriedem | i.e. resize with vgpus doesn't work completely, you have to rebuild the server after the resize to get the vgpus | |
| 16:27:42 | mriedem | btw, now that i say that, i wonder if that would work for bw resources as a workaround for cold migration ^ | |
| 16:28:13 | gibi | mriedem: OK then I will propose the first microversion top of the create / delete support and deferr the move support microversion question for Train | |
| 16:28:27 | mriedem | gibi: or at least defer for a week until dan is back :) | |
| 16:28:39 | gibi | mriedem: yeah :) | |
| 16:28:51 | gibi | mriedem: does rebuild re-allocate today? | |
| 16:29:11 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: mriedem i was under the impression rebuild would not work either in stien | |
| 16:30:16 | mriedem | gibi: no, since resources shouldn't really change on rebuild since the flavor doesn't change | |
| 16:30:31 | mriedem | so i guess that won't work | |
| 16:30:34 | sean-k-mooney | its not strictly a move operation but i has understood that effectivly start,stop,pause/unpause,suspend and resume were the only actions that would work | |
| 16:30:34 | gibi | mriedem: so it would be an extra check during rebuild, to see if healing is needed | |
| 16:30:55 | mriedem | rebuild is specifically not a move | |
| 16:31:01 | mriedem | there is no resource claim on rebiuld | |
| 16:31:02 | mriedem | *rebuild | |
| 16:31:18 | sean-k-mooney | well unless the image is chaged | |
| 16:31:26 | mriedem | even though we have an outstanding bug about the pci resource usage changing b/c of changing the image | |
| 16:31:28 | sean-k-mooney | in which case we have to go back to the scheuler | |