Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-10-03
13:57:01 mriedem from a coding api perspective, if i'm relying on the host mapping uuid to get/match the compute node uuid, then how do i know if that host is managing one or many nodes
13:57:09 mriedem also,
13:57:26 dansmith mriedem: maybe I dunno
13:57:30 mriedem the host mapping name doesn't / shouldn't change (the hostname on the host would have to change which is bad),
13:57:43 mriedem but i can guarantee you that the compute node uuid generated by the compute service will change
13:57:55 mriedem and that would be an up-call or new discovery from the controller to sync those up
13:58:16 sean-k-mooney its unfortunate that we are not usign a uuid5 based on teh host name for the compute node uuid
13:58:34 mriedem all you have to is (1) start the service, (2) discover it to create the host mapping, (3) delete the compute service (4) restart it and bam you have a new compute node with a new uuid
13:59:00 mriedem sean-k-mooney: that's not a bad idea...in the non-ironic case,
13:59:16 mriedem for ironic, since rocky we make the compute node == resource provider == ironic node all use the ironic node uuid
13:59:22 mriedem that has caused some problems...
13:59:32 bauzas mriedem: yup, either the audit command loops over RPs, or asks for a specific RP UUID
13:59:51 sean-k-mooney the ironic node id often matche the chassis uuid backed into the hardware
14:00:13 mriedem meeting time
14:00:41 dansmith mriedem: sorry I lost track of that convo because I was having two
14:01:06 mriedem this is the problem i'm talking about with using static uuids https://review.opendev.org/#/q/Iafba419fe86446ffe636721f523fb619f8f787b3
14:01:12 mriedem sean-k-mooney: ^
14:01:53 mriedem somewhat related https://review.opendev.org/#/c/684849/
14:02:11 sean-k-mooney oh ya i vaguely rememebr that it was related to the phyical node reblanice to a different compute service
14:02:38 mriedem the first is related to maintenance mode on a node, the latter is rebalance
14:02:56 sean-k-mooney ack
14:03:21 stephenfin mriedem: <3
14:03:47 sean-k-mooney i need to grab somthing to eat before another meeting in an hour so ill join the nova meeting in link 20-30 mins
14:03:49 sean-k-mooney brb
14:04:10 mordred mriedem: in microversion 2.64, os-server-group changed from accepting policies=[] to policy="" ... what happens to additional policies created with lower microversion?
14:04:39 mriedem it was unpossible on lower microversions
14:04:46 mriedem shitty api design allowed a list but the backing db model didn't
14:04:59 mriedem something like that - the json schema only allowed a list with an entry of exactly 1
14:05:05 mordred ah - cool
14:05:21 mordred so that makes it super easy to support properly in sdk
14:06:07 mriedem mordred: yeah see the description of the parameter in the ref https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=create-server-group-detail#create-server-group
14:06:16 mriedem before 2.64: "A list of exactly one policy name to associate with the server group."
14:06:41 mordred that's amazing
14:07:14 mriedem the poor api design before or the fact it was actually documented?
14:07:16 mriedem both?!
14:07:24 mordred both!
14:07:45 mordred also - I'm glad the answer this time does not require me to figure out how to do more complex logic
14:07:59 mordred sg_attrs['policy'] = policies[0] # this is awesome
14:08:04 mriedem yup
14:08:40 mordred oh - although - I still probably want to figure out how to switch somethign there - because older mvs won't have the policy parameter
14:08:47 mordred maybe I'll just wait until someone complains
14:09:35 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add reserved schema migrations for Ussuri https://review.opendev.org/686411
14:12:03 stephenfin melwitt: I assume I can kill the entire 'networks' quota thing when nova-net is removed?
14:12:13 stephenfin It seems it's not enabled by default atm anyway
14:13:36 efried sean-k-mooney: do you understand the SEV bug well enough to phrase a docs & reno warning saying it's broke? In case the fix doesn't make Train?
14:16:29 stephenfin mriedem++ lyarwood++ thanks for getting those novaclient fixes in so quickly
14:16:35 mriedem np
14:17:08 stephenfin efried: I'll take a lash at it now
14:17:15 efried thanks stephenfin
14:23:41 sean-k-mooney efried: if you mean the virto/dma issue yes i can proably write something up
14:24:21 sean-k-mooney i dont understand all the lowlevel details but i think i understand enough for a reno listing it as known issues
14:25:16 sean-k-mooney if stephenfin give it a go ill be happy to review too
14:25:36 sean-k-mooney the metting is in #openstack-meeting right
14:26:09 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova stable/train: docs: Highlight the current broken state of SEV https://review.opendev.org/686414
14:27:07 stephenfin sean-k-mooney: yeah, #openstack-meeting
14:27:52 stephenfin and that's the reno ^^ I don't know if I need more details or if it's more nuanced than that (are there only certain conditions where virtio-scsi will be present, for example)?
14:28:07 sean-k-mooney yes
14:28:13 sean-k-mooney you have to opt in to it
14:28:25 sean-k-mooney ill review and add details as needed
14:28:49 sean-k-mooney then you can translate form sean-speak to english
14:30:46 mriedem stephenfin: comments inline
14:57:50 kashyap efried: Have not decided anything yet here: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/684375/ (on that 'preferred' thing). Will respond on the change
14:58:29 efried ack
15:00:41 efried tetsuro: o/ are you an hour off? :P
15:00:42 dansmith efried: you should approve my spec so you can include the sponsor revision in your template patch :) https://review.opendev.org/#/c/686232/
15:01:23 efried dansmith: you should add the core liaison section so I don't have to :)
15:01:35 dansmith efried: before it's in the template?
15:01:56 efried sure, there's nothing preventing additional untemplated sections afaik
15:01:57 cdent efried, mriedem : we got rid of healing of any allocations for healthy instance in nova-compute, yes? So if a nova-compute comes up and can't find a resource provider for itself, it will create one and its inventory but that's it. To fix things 'heal allocations' in nova-manage is the way to go.
15:02:10 efried dansmith: I'm only half serious, will review
15:02:14 dansmith efried: not sure I could get behind that heresy
15:02:49 sean-k-mooney while we are talking about specs ill jsut leave this one here https://review.opendev.org/#/c/683174/
15:02:52 efried cdent: I don't remember, would have to go look
15:03:07 sean-k-mooney efried: is there a patch i should rebase it on?
15:03:21 cdent efried: if it's gone, I'm considering ways of putting it back...
15:03:23 sean-k-mooney or just wait for the template change to merge
15:03:24 dansmith efried: well, if you find something to -1 over I'll add it in there
15:03:30 efried sean-k-mooney: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/685857/
15:03:46 efried dansmith: ack. May be a little bit, though, I'm kinda backed up.
15:03:56 sean-k-mooney efried: thanks
15:03:58 efried (insert metamucil joke)
15:04:21 dansmith my spec is very fiber-rich, fwiw
15:04:34 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/python-novaclient stable/rocky: Stop silently ignoring invalid 'nova boot --hint' options https://review.opendev.org/685983
15:04:35 efried sean-k-mooney: hold on a tick, I need to make an update to that.
15:04:49 dansmith melwitt: you probably would also be interested in approving my patch: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/686232/ if you're around :)
15:07:13 sean-k-mooney efried: sure im on another meeting so im not going to update it until after
15:09:42 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add 'Core Liaison' section to spec template https://review.opendev.org/685857
15:09:49 efried mriedem, sean-k-mooney: done ^
15:12:06 efried dansmith: it would be neat if you would volunteer to sponsor https://review.opendev.org/#/c/685857/3/specs/ussuri/approved/provider-config-file.rst@319
15:12:44 efried Since it was, like, your idea
15:12:58 efried (I know, I know. But still.)
15:15:05 dansmith efried: uh, wut
15:15:37 dansmith oh you mean I said something in a PTG a year ago?
15:15:42 efried yes
15:15:48 efried you can't un-say it
15:15:57 mriedem cdent: correct
15:15:59 efried it was more like six months ago
15:16:08 efried statute of limitations
15:16:18 dansmith sure, but just because I think that's the way it should be done if we're going to do it, doesn't mean I think we should or that I want to put my neck out there for it, right?
15:17:22 dansmith I guess it depends on whether we tie the sponsorship thing purely to "help the contributor with the process" or "I plan to review this myself"

Earlier   Later