| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-01-06 | |||
| 10:35:09 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: by the way i have not got around to doing the full code review for the cyborg shevle patches but did my respoce make sense | |
| 10:35:20 | sean-k-mooney | regarding the conductor chagnes | |
| 10:37:24 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I'll look at them later today, I was on a meeting just before and I want to rebase my own routed networks series | |
| 10:37:37 | sean-k-mooney | no worries | |
| 10:37:38 | bauzas | in other words, I lag :D | |
| 10:38:46 | gibi | stephenfin: there is a trivial review https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/769467 you can lok at | |
| 10:39:06 | sean-k-mooney | hehe well i was indening to do a fully review yesterady and havent started other then to respond ot your comments so your still ahead of me | |
| 10:39:15 | stephenfin | gibi: have it open already :) | |
| 10:40:34 | gibi | besides that I have nothing :) | |
| 10:40:45 | gibi | I need to do a bunch of rebases | |
| 10:49:14 | sean-k-mooney | speaking of rebases i wil be rebasing my vdpa spec in a day or so but if people have time it would be nice if ye could review that spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/764999 and also the numa port polices spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/765901 | |
| 10:50:03 | sean-k-mooney | i intend to start pushing some standalone patches for those this week namely the xml generation for vdpa and some constants for the newtuon extensions | |
| 10:51:25 | sean-k-mooney | the larger change will still be a few weeks out but i would like to start submitting an merging some of the smaller patches which would be dead code but easilly reviewable while i work on the more complex part but the spec need to be approved first before that can happen | |
| 11:07:50 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Create a fixture around fake_notifier https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758446 | |
| 11:07:50 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Use the non polling notification waiter in func test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758445 | |
| 11:07:51 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Use NotificationFixture for legacy notifications too https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758448 | |
| 11:09:12 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Test the NotificationFixture https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758450 | |
| 11:09:13 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Move fake_notifier impl under NotificationFixture https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758451 | |
| 11:16:16 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Drop statistics-style fields from os-hypervisors https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/764040 | |
| 11:16:17 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Normalize exception handling for os-hypervisors https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/769520 | |
| 11:16:17 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: tests: Remove 'test_extended_hypervisors' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/769519 | |
| 11:17:13 | stephenfin | gibi: Done ^ Sorry for the delay | |
| 11:17:22 | gibi | on it | |
| 11:29:10 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Add a routed networks scheduler pre-filter https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749068 | |
| 11:29:10 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Add requested_networks field to RequestSpec object https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/749977 | |
| 11:43:00 | sean-k-mooney | does anywone know if shareing resouce providers actully work by the way | |
| 11:43:36 | sean-k-mooney | its in relateion to http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-January/019647.html | |
| 11:43:48 | sean-k-mooney | specifically for the RBD image backend | |
| 11:44:28 | sean-k-mooney | if we used provider.yaml to set the local disk_gb inventory to 0 and created a shareing resocue provider with a disk_gb inventory for the ceph pool | |
| 11:44:55 | lyarwood | I don't think anyone was working on that | |
| 11:45:02 | sean-k-mooney | then added the MISC_SHARES_VIA_AGGREGATE trait to the RP and adedd the RP and the comptue to an aggreate would it work | |
| 11:45:14 | sean-k-mooney | lyarwood: they have not been for like 2 years | |
| 11:45:25 | sean-k-mooney | but i tought the placment side was done | |
| 11:45:37 | sean-k-mooney | i just dont know if anyone has ever tested it | |
| 11:45:58 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: we don't have functional or other integration tests for it so I assume that it does not work | |
| 11:46:12 | lyarwood | no idea sorry | |
| 11:46:17 | sean-k-mooney | hehe ya that my base assumtion with openstack too | |
| 11:46:21 | sean-k-mooney | if its not tested its broken | |
| 11:47:07 | sean-k-mooney | if it did work technially operators/installer tooll could configure it and actully get correct reporting for shared storage this way | |
| 11:47:55 | sean-k-mooney | the real question is will the placement allocation candiate include the inventory form the sharing provider | |
| 11:48:04 | sean-k-mooney | using the request we currently make | |
| 11:48:27 | sean-k-mooney | it "should" but i have no idea if it will actully work | |
| 11:49:30 | sean-k-mooney | placment has functrion api test for shared resouces https://github.com/openstack/placement/blob/master/placement/tests/functional/gabbits/shared-resources.yaml | |
| 11:50:51 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/placement/blob/master/placement/tests/functional/gabbits/shared-resources.yaml#L135-L143 | |
| 11:50:57 | sean-k-mooney | it looks like it should work | |
| 11:51:09 | sean-k-mooney | if you read those top to bottom | |
| 11:52:44 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I'm not sure that our resize and migrate logic works properly with sharing providers | |
| 11:52:46 | sean-k-mooney | if i had time i would really like to test that and write that up in docs because it would be greate do document how to correctly deploy using sharing agggreats to model storage | |
| 11:53:02 | gibi | currently we copy the allocation including the part that is allocated from sharing providers | |
| 11:53:14 | gibi | even if the same sharing provider shares with the new destination | |
| 11:53:29 | sean-k-mooney | we would just do double allcoations then | |
| 11:53:32 | sean-k-mooney | which i think is ok | |
| 11:53:52 | sean-k-mooney | it would reconsile the vaules wehn we do resize confirm | |
| 11:54:07 | gibi | hm, yes | |
| 11:54:10 | sean-k-mooney | i mean its not perfect but its not dangourous | |
| 11:54:24 | sean-k-mooney | it would jsut cause some failures wehn near capasity | |
| 12:00:34 | gibi | stephenfin: left feedback in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/764040 | |
| 12:01:37 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: do we have any ci tests using provider.yaml | |
| 12:01:48 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: hm, good question | |
| 12:01:59 | gibi | I don't think we have tempest tesd | |
| 12:02:00 | gibi | test | |
| 12:02:04 | sean-k-mooney | im wondering if i could maybe test this theory with a change to the ceph job | |
| 12:02:23 | gibi | we have some functional test | |
| 12:03:54 | gibi | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/ccb2e11129d4a0730b0ba19a7f49ed8fc5a05f6d/nova/tests/functional/compute/test_resource_tracker.py#L665 | |
| 12:05:30 | sean-k-mooney | specificly i was thinking of configure both compute nodes to report 0 disk_gb and having a pretest hook create the sharing resouce provider | |
| 12:06:11 | gibi | I think it can be done | |
| 12:07:53 | sean-k-mooney | ya i think it would be worth testing at least | |
| 12:08:12 | sean-k-mooney | ill have to try and make time to do it. | |
| 12:08:18 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Drop statistics-style fields from os-hypervisors https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/764040 | |
| 12:08:26 | stephenfin | gibi: done | |
| 12:09:50 | lyarwood | sean-k-mooney: I'd be interested in helping with that | |
| 12:10:06 | lyarwood | once I've finished this machine type stuff | |
| 12:11:10 | stephenfin | gibi++ thanks :) | |
| 12:12:08 | stephenfin | gmann: When you're around, could do with some input on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/765798/ I'm kind of lost as to what the next steps are /o\ | |
| 12:12:16 | sean-k-mooney | hehe i was hoping you would say that. long term it would be nice to be able to do it automatically but if this worked we could do it via an install and docuemnt it for this release and figure out how to make it work out of the box in the future | |
| 12:12:33 | gibi | stephenfin: further comment in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/764040 | |
| 12:14:50 | lyarwood | sean-k-mooney: yup agreed | |
| 12:19:18 | sean-k-mooney | the main downside to this approch is without a reshape this would only work for new installs | |
| 12:19:32 | sean-k-mooney | but it would work for new installs so that would at least be progress | |
| 12:20:17 | sean-k-mooney | for existing deployments we would need to reshape the allcoation form the compute node rp to the shareing one | |
| 12:21:01 | sean-k-mooney | or sharing ones, you coudl have 1 ceph cluster per az or cell or something consiveably | |
| 12:21:29 | sean-k-mooney | aggrates would take care of modeling that however | |
| 12:23:26 | lyarwood | yeah the upgrade case isn't going to be fun to handle tbh | |
| 12:25:16 | sean-k-mooney | no matter what we do i dont see that improving much. sure if we can write a reshap but it will he complicated | |
| 12:25:59 | sean-k-mooney | i suspect a nova manage command would acatully be a better approch | |
| 12:26:32 | sean-k-mooney | where you spcify the sharing rp and the compute host to reshape | |
| 12:27:07 | sean-k-mooney | hum actully i guess placment-mange not nova mange as this is all on the placement side | |
| 13:35:36 | sean-k-mooney | lyarwood: by the way have you reviewd https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder-specs/+/766732 | |
| 13:36:52 | sean-k-mooney | its propsoing extending os-brick to spawn a deamon process ot monitor and heal NVMEoF volules created over MD raids | |
| 13:37:17 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. havign it actily monitoing the underlying raid config and healing it | |
| 13:37:46 | sean-k-mooney | unfortunetly that is now approved on the cinder cide but i dont think this should be in the scope of os-brick to do personlally | |
| 13:38:30 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: lyarwood did this come up in the nova cinder cross project dicusstion at the ptg? | |
| 13:38:50 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: lyarwood i dont see any nova review on the spec at all | |
| 13:39:17 | sean-k-mooney | this is the os-brick patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-brick/+/768576 | |
| 13:41:37 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: we had some discussion with qqmber about this on monday | |
| 13:50:18 | lyarwood | sean-k-mooney: iirc it came up in the cinder track ahead of the nova track starting up | |
| 13:51:00 | lyarwood | sean-k-mooney: it's definitently not in n-cpu's wheel house to look after stuff like this so I'm not sure where you would have it if not os-brick? | |
| 13:52:36 | sean-k-mooney | in a standalone agnet | |
| 13:52:47 | sean-k-mooney | the fact is it would be executing in the n-cpu process | |
| 13:53:01 | sean-k-mooney | granted as a child process spawned by os-brick | |