Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-08-13
19:36:13 efried i.e. can I Depends-On a devstack patch from nova without twaddling .zuul.yaml?
19:37:38 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add nova-lxc job to the experimental queue https://review.opendev.org/676024
19:38:06 mriedem you said twaddle
19:38:37 mriedem eventually the job inherits from devstack-base which requires devstack
19:40:59 efried okay, cool
20:31:22 mriedem efried: i volunteer alex_xu and gibi for the project update in shanghai
20:31:46 efried ++
20:31:52 efried dual language
20:35:15 openstackgerrit Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.75 - Multiple API cleanup changes https://review.opendev.org/676275
20:39:44 openstackgerrit Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: API microversion 2.76: Add 'power-update' external event https://review.opendev.org/666792
20:49:41 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/stein: rt: only map compute node if we created it https://review.opendev.org/676278
21:09:30 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: rt: only map compute node if we created it https://review.opendev.org/676280
21:17:59 sean-k-mooney dansmith: technically yes just list would be fine. but on python 2.7 you would be constucting the list twice, six.move.filter is itertools.iflter on py27 and just the filter builtin on py3 so six.moves.fiter alway return an interator which we colapse into a list
21:18:31 sean-k-mooney we proably dont care too much for that specifc case
21:24:02 sean-k-mooney efried: mriedem dansmith want me to drop the use of six? or just fix typos/nits or leave it as is
21:26:16 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova stable/ocata: Replace non-nova server fault message https://review.opendev.org/674908
21:26:23 mriedem sean-k-mooney: you're listifying twice on py27 anyway yeah?
21:26:27 mriedem so dropping six is fine
21:26:48 sean-k-mooney with six.moves.filter no
21:28:15 sean-k-mooney by that i mean it will only build the list once with six.move.filter regardless of the version of python
21:28:38 sean-k-mooney but i also dont partaclly care too much for this so ill do whatever ye prefer
21:31:41 melwitt can anyone link me a shortcut to where the "strict host isolation" work is going on at this point? is it called "dedicated CPUs" now?
21:31:42 efried This is up to dansmith and his passive-aggressive no-vote
21:32:08 efried melwitt: are you talking about forbidden aggregates?
21:32:08 sean-k-mooney strict host isolation?
21:32:32 efried melwitt: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:bp/placement-req-filter-forbidden-aggregates+(status:open+OR+status:merged)
21:32:41 melwitt it's the thing where if you have windows licenses or something, you only want certain tenants landing on those and other tenants not allowed to land on them
21:33:02 sean-k-mooney ya that the forbidden aggretates thing
21:33:02 efried Yeah, that ^
21:33:08 efried not at all related to "dedicated CPUs" https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/cpu-resources
21:33:12 melwitt ok, thanks. I lost track of what it was called today
21:33:19 melwitt haha, well, glad I asked
21:33:23 efried heh, yeah, now we're calling it "isolated aggregates"
21:33:26 efried yes, yes you are
21:33:41 melwitt customers asking about it
21:33:58 sean-k-mooney efried: well to melwitt defence until this relase you have to isolate dedicated cpu into there own host aggreate
21:34:07 sean-k-mooney so i get why she might link those
21:34:12 efried you wouldn't have wanted to get entrenched in that series only to realize it wasn't the one you cared about :P
21:34:18 melwitt because today they have to label all aggregates with something in order to have guests not land on certain aggregates and it's a pain
21:34:37 efried melwitt: you still kinda have to do that.
21:34:57 efried oh, you mean you even have to label the ones you're *not* isolating?
21:35:03 melwitt yes
21:35:05 sean-k-mooney unless you use my/rdolfos out of tree filter...
21:35:07 efried mm
21:35:22 sean-k-mooney well actuly that still neede you to put stuff in aggrate metaddata
21:35:36 melwitt because if something lacks a label, a guest can still land there. if I'm thinking about this right
21:35:45 melwitt lacks a key, I mean
21:36:40 melwitt and what they want is, guests can only land on this host if flavor key=value matches aggregate key=value and aggregates that do not have that key will not match
21:37:07 sean-k-mooney if you want to requrie traits to be request to land on a host. you need either https://github.com/openstack/nfv-filters/blob/master/nfv_filters/nova/scheduler/filters/aggregate_instance_type_filter.py or my reverse required tratis featrue i wand in plamcneet
21:37:19 mriedem melwitt: yes you are correct
21:37:48 melwitt yesss I was right once
21:37:49 mriedem with current in-tree filters you can restrict things to host aggregates but not exclude other unrestricted things from landing on those same hosts
21:38:02 mriedem which is why you have to create aggregates for everything to strictly isolate everything
21:38:06 mriedem which is the mgmt pain in the ass
21:38:16 melwitt yeah exactly
21:38:40 melwitt they've labeled everything like, windows=YES and windows=NO, for example, to get the strict isolation
21:39:10 mriedem https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/admin/configuration/schedulers.html#aggregatemultitenancyisolation has an example as well about the exclusion problem
21:39:12 sean-k-mooney yes but we fixed that and the sylvain fast revreted it
21:39:29 efried melwitt: the series is pretty close to landing, just a couple of little tweaks requested by dansmith, so if you want in, now's the time.
21:39:55 melwitt thanks for the pointers. I'll read through that so I can let them know where upstream is at with the feature
21:40:50 melwitt they asked for the feature but I know it's been in the works for a long time and wasn't sure what it was being called now :) thanks all
21:57:04 openstackgerrit Dustin Cowles proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Load custom providers to Resource Tracker https://review.opendev.org/676029
21:57:04 openstackgerrit Dustin Cowles proposed openstack/nova master: Provider config file schema and loader https://review.opendev.org/673341
21:59:02 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: Hook resource_tracker to remove stale node information https://review.opendev.org/676282
22:03:12 melwitt oh, the ability to add a suffix to filter_tenant_id is only when filtering with placement
22:08:41 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Fix misuse of nova.objects.base.obj_equal_prims https://review.opendev.org/676030
22:16:08 mriedem yup
22:17:09 openstack Launchpad bug 1802111 in OpenStack Compute (nova) rocky "Unable to assign more than 7 tenants to a filter_tenant_id string" [Low,Fix committed] - Assigned to Matt Riedemann (mriedem)
22:17:09 mriedem https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1802111
22:23:20 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: rt: only map compute node if we created it https://review.opendev.org/675704
22:23:38 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Add CrossCellMigrationTask https://review.opendev.org/631581
22:27:52 openstackgerrit sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: lxc: make use of filter python3 compatible https://review.opendev.org/676263
22:30:00 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: lxc: make use of filter python3 compatible https://review.opendev.org/676263
22:33:56 sean-k-mooney mriedem: i dont know why i even try somtimes. i actully spell checked that in grammerly then copied it and decied to tweak it slightly
22:34:42 sean-k-mooney i should never tweak a commit message out of a tool that fixes spelling because i obviously just cant
22:34:47 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add nova-lxc job to the experimental queue https://review.opendev.org/676024
22:34:59 sean-k-mooney thanks for fixing it directly :)
22:36:28 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add nova-lxc job to the experimental queue https://review.opendev.org/676024
22:37:24 mriedem you must have run it through the olde englishifier to change behavior to behaviour
22:38:38 sean-k-mooney actully i proably dont have it set to us english
22:38:59 mriedem oooo
22:39:02 mriedem don't tell trump that
22:39:22 sean-k-mooney sorry i belive its called american my bad :P
22:39:28 mriedem 'merican
22:39:29 mriedem please
22:39:34 mriedem pew pew yee hawww
22:41:33 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: rt: only map compute node if we created it https://review.opendev.org/676285
22:50:28 melwitt argh, I'm too dumb to understand placement_aggregate_required_for_tenants after reading the help
22:51:15 sean-k-mooney what is the help text?
22:51:18 melwitt ok, the reno helps
22:51:37 sean-k-mooney that praobly means we need better help test in the config option
22:51:54 melwitt "This setting, when limit_tenants_to_placement_aggregate=True, will control whether or not a tenant with no aggregate affinity will be allowed to schedule to any available node. If aggregates are used to limit some tenants but not all, then this should be False. If all tenants should be confined via aggregate, then this should be True to prevent them from receiving unrestricted scheduling to any available node."
22:52:23 mriedem there is a doc on it
22:52:43 melwitt I'm looking at it now
22:53:08 melwitt the conf option help was like.... not understandable by me
22:53:19 sean-k-mooney it could be worded clearer but tl;dr is if you want to require all tenants be mapped to placmenet aggrates then set it to true
22:53:24 sean-k-mooney otherwise set it to false
22:54:57 mriedem "Multiple tenants may be added to a single aggregate by appending a serial number to the key, such as filter_tenant_id:123." is lacking a big
22:54:58 mriedem *bit
22:55:00 sean-k-mooney melwitt: i would have to read that twice or tree times to parse it if had not seen it before

Earlier   Later