| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-06-11 | |||
| 14:31:23 | cdent | sean-k-mooney: the mysteries of the DRS are beyond me. If you can think it, it probably does it if you set the right setting. | |
| 14:31:49 | kashyap | yonglihe: I've also asked the QEMU post-copy migration author/maintainer to look at the spec, too. (I myself need to re-look at it, just been buried) | |
| 14:31:59 | kashyap | (s/need/"wanted to"/) | |
| 14:32:10 | sean-k-mooney | cdent: ya i assumed that its proably done under the hood in vspher or whatever | |
| 14:32:15 | efried | cdent: Well, stephenfin is looking for a way to fix whatever we're doing in the test, but so far we're stymied on that. If it's not possible (or if it takes us longer than a few more minutes to figure out) I'd like to just disable the test. But since you touched it, and your code change implies some kind of understanding of the root cause of the breakage, I though I would ask you if you know what's going on there. | |
| 14:32:52 | cdent | my understanding was based on chasing many links through the interwebs, not understanding the tokenizer | |
| 14:33:06 | efried | okay | |
| 14:34:57 | efried | I'm trying to repro on bionic. Not happening at 2.7.15rc1 | |
| 14:35:18 | efried | aha, but does reproduce on latest | |
| 14:35:29 | stephenfin | yeah, I can't reproduce on Fedora 20 with 2.7.16 | |
| 14:35:30 | efried | which lists self as 2.7.15+ -- not helpful :( | |
| 14:42:21 | stephenfin | or 3.6.8. Hmm | |
| 14:44:23 | stephenfin | I always forget how damn big the nova repo is | |
| 14:44:37 | stephenfin | Definitely should have shallow cloned | |
| 14:52:54 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: In that PostCopy spec, this naming sounds scary to me: "*_permit_reboot_risk" | |
| 15:03:53 | efried | stephenfin: It's looking like it's only broken at 3.6.7 (some releaselevels - at least 'final') and 2.7.15 (likewise). So we could skip those and move on with life. | |
| 15:04:10 | efried | oh, never mind, I just reproduced at 3.6.8 'final'. | |
| 15:04:13 | stephenfin | If that's the case, yup, let's do that | |
| 15:04:14 | stephenfin | damn | |
| 15:05:07 | efried | stephenfin: what's your 3.6.8 where it wasn't reproducing? | |
| 15:05:17 | efried | stephenfin: and did you remember to turn off the skip decorator? :P | |
| 15:05:39 | stephenfin | python36-3.6.8-6.fc30.x86_64 | |
| 15:05:49 | stephenfin | That only applies to 2.7, no? | |
| 15:06:00 | stephenfin | I've got it reproduced in an Ubuntu VM | |
| 15:06:12 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: yes i agree i dont like that charaterisation which is why i suggeted other names instead | |
| 15:06:36 | efried | stephenfin: The skip decorator is skipping the test in anything >= 3.6.7 | |
| 15:07:09 | stephenfin | Sorry, yeah, 3.6 | |
| 15:07:19 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: my -1 is mainly for the extraspec names an di have one question regarding if post copy and auto converge can be used togeter at teh qemu/libvirt layer | |
| 15:07:21 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Thanks. Didn't read everything yet; need a fresher mind. | |
| 15:07:38 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: I asked Dave (PostCopy author) to also comment, FWIW. | |
| 15:07:51 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: cool | |
| 15:07:53 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Another thing is, how does one prioritize between PostCopy and AutoConverge | |
| 15:08:24 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: currently its states its an error to use both | |
| 15:09:05 | sean-k-mooney | aparently nova perfers post copy over auto converge | |
| 15:09:45 | sean-k-mooney | although if i rememebr correctly danpb prefered the idea of having auto converge enabled by default in nova and was less confindent in post copy | |
| 15:09:57 | kashyap | 17:08 < kashyap> dgilbert: Can you use PostCopy and AutoConverge at the _same_ time, Dave? | |
| 15:09:57 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: That's the response: | |
| 15:10:00 | kashyap | 17:08 < dgilbert> hmmmm | |
| 15:10:03 | kashyap | 17:09 < dgilbert> if you can I don't think we've ever tested it | |
| 15:10:40 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: The thing is, some workloads will be "surprized" in a bad way to realize AutoConverge is auto-enabled | |
| 15:10:43 | cfriesen | it doesn't make sense to use postcopy and autoconverge at the same time | |
| 15:11:08 | kashyap | cfriesen: Yeah, it doesn't. One needs to know WTF they're doing before they start trying things | |
| 15:11:09 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: ya i know things like watcher | |
| 15:11:11 | cfriesen | once you've enabled postcopy it'll naturally slow down as it pulls pages over the network, no need to artificially slow it down to allow to converge | |
| 15:11:49 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: well autoconverge only slow it down if it failed to copy less the half of the outstanding pages in the last interval | |
| 15:11:51 | kashyap | cfriesen: Yeah, the unsatisfying answer, as usual is, "it depends on the workload" | |
| 15:12:07 | sean-k-mooney | and it does not slow down the workload intially untill a certin time has passed | |
| 15:12:27 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: details. :) | |
| 15:12:48 | stephenfin | printf-debugging++ | |
| 15:12:55 | sean-k-mooney | if you are dirtiying memory fast enough i dont know if post-copy is required to ever finish or if write to remote memory will always be paged to local memory instead | |
| 15:13:15 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: once you've written to all local pages, then post-copy is done. :) | |
| 15:13:19 | sean-k-mooney | if post-copy works by treating the remote meory as read only then its fine | |
| 15:13:25 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: it does | |
| 15:13:36 | sean-k-mooney | ok then ya no need to use both | |
| 15:13:44 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: but if you lose the network while in post-copy, you're hosed | |
| 15:13:53 | sean-k-mooney | yep i know | |
| 15:14:19 | sean-k-mooney | but if you looes netwroking with shared storage your equally screwed | |
| 15:16:01 | artom | We're allowed methods in neutronv2/api.py that aren't in network/api.py, right? | |
| 15:16:16 | sean-k-mooney | private ones yes | |
| 15:16:16 | artom | Or is this like virt drivers, they all need to match? | |
| 15:16:24 | artom | Public ones | |
| 15:16:30 | sean-k-mooney | what methods are you adding | |
| 15:16:43 | artom | The get_events stuff, see convo with dansmith above | |
| 15:16:43 | sean-k-mooney | that moduel shoudl really only have methods that call neutron | |
| 15:17:01 | sean-k-mooney | its does not interact with the api | |
| 15:17:08 | sean-k-mooney | so why would it be in that module | |
| 15:17:30 | artom | TBH, because dansmith said so, and it makes sense to me as well | |
| 15:17:37 | artom | But mostly because he said so ;) | |
| 15:17:50 | artom | This is not something I have the energy to debate | |
| 15:17:59 | dansmith | artom: don | |
| 15:18:00 | dansmith | artom: don't hedge :) | |
| 15:18:44 | efried | stephenfin: I'm stumped. Are you getting anywhere? If not, I'm going to call time and just disable the test for now. | |
| 15:18:54 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: why in the api module and not here https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/model.py#L460 | |
| 15:18:58 | stephenfin | efried: Yeah, I'm down in pycodestle | |
| 15:19:02 | stephenfin | *pycodestyle | |
| 15:19:17 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: I said nova/network/something would be fine too | |
| 15:19:47 | artom | I wasn't aware of the "must call neutron API" rule | |
| 15:20:04 | efried | stephenfin: Was that "yeah I'm getting somewhere" or "yeah disable the test"? | |
| 15:20:14 | dansmith | artom: I'm aware of no such rule | |
| 15:20:25 | sean-k-mooney | artom: im not sure it a rule but that module is nova.network.neutronv2.api | |
| 15:20:37 | stephenfin | efried: Disable it. I'll keep looking | |
| 15:20:37 | artom | sean-k-mooney, actually yeah, with the new abstraction suggested by dansmith (plug-time vs bind-time), it fits in model as well | |
| 15:20:43 | stephenfin | Here's our issue though https://github.com/PyCQA/pycodestyle/blob/2.0.0/pycodestyle.py#L1639 | |
| 15:20:57 | stephenfin | We shouldn't be getting there but I don't know yet what's changed | |
| 15:20:59 | sean-k-mooney | pretty much everything it does interacts with the neutron api in one way or another | |
| 15:21:30 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: we have constants defined in that module, and this detail is completely related to "what to expect from the neutron api" so I have no problem saying it should (or can) be in there | |
| 15:21:34 | stephenfin | Things like this are why I was trying to get us onto a newer hacking version. Things invariably break | |
| 15:21:49 | sean-k-mooney | artom: plugtime and bind time is more or less what i was thinking about in the neutron spec too so that makes sense to me | |
| 15:21:49 | efried | stephenfin: aren't we on a newer hacking version at this point? | |
| 15:22:03 | stephenfin | not really. Hacking is relying on a really old version of flake8 | |
| 15:22:08 | artom | kawn sen suss! | |
| 15:22:11 | stephenfin | Like, super old | |
| 15:23:09 | stephenfin | and I can't update because they broke all the things in flake8 3.x :( https://gitlab.com/pycqa/flake8/issues/545 | |
| 15:23:46 | sean-k-mooney | ok well its not where i would instintivly look for them but i can live with it. | |
| 15:25:05 | sean-k-mooney | artom: to your orginal question https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/api.py isthe old nova networks api and the neton one extends it | |
| 15:25:16 | sean-k-mooney | i think you can ignore https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/api.py at this point | |
| 15:25:48 | artom | sean-k-mooney, ack, thanks for looking :) | |
| 15:26:04 | artom | (Though tbf my original question was rendered moot when we agreed to put it in model) | |
| 15:27:31 | sean-k-mooney | artom: :) by the way i proposed https://review.opendev.org/#/c/664442/ to test this | |
| 15:28:13 | artom | sean-k-mooney, yep, thanks for that | |