| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-05-19 | |||
| 12:35:24 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yes, it needed a sizeable refactoring to properly fix that bug | |
| 12:35:32 | sean-k-mooney | the behaivior before and after modulo bugs is identical from blackbox perspctive | |
| 12:35:32 | sean-k-mooney | the behaivior before and after modulo bugs is identical from blackbox perspctive | |
| 12:35:43 | gibi | yepp | |
| 12:43:51 | elod | yes... the refactor... o:) thanks for the details, it is useful for me to hear other opinions as well! | |
| 12:43:51 | elod | yes... the refactor... o:) thanks for the details, it is useful for me to hear other opinions as well! | |
| 12:44:13 | lyarwood | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/790660 - core reviews on this bugfix would be appreciated if anyone has time this week | |
| 12:44:13 | lyarwood | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/790660 - core reviews on this bugfix would be appreciated if anyone has time this week | |
| 12:44:23 | lyarwood | and the series below it sorry | |
| 12:44:23 | lyarwood | and the series below it sorry | |
| 12:44:37 | gibi | lyarwood: added to my queue | |
| 12:44:37 | gibi | lyarwood: added to my queue | |
| 12:44:43 | lyarwood | thanks | |
| 13:18:17 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Add same_subtree field to RequestLevelParams https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/791503 | |
| 13:18:18 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Support same_subtree in allocation_canadidate query https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/791505 | |
| 13:18:18 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Bump min placement microversion to 1.36 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/791504 | |
| 13:18:19 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Transfer RequestLevelParams from ports to scheduling https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/791506 | |
| 13:18:19 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Support the new port resource_request format https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/787208 | |
| 13:28:32 | sean-k-mooney | ... https://twitter.com/freenodestaff https://fuchsnet.ch/freenode-resign-letter.txt | |
| 13:28:32 | sean-k-mooney | ... https://twitter.com/freenodestaff https://fuchsnet.ch/freenode-resign-letter.txt | |
| 13:33:52 | sean-k-mooney | os maybe moving to irc.libera.chat i guess although we will have to see how the topic plays out in the mailing list | |
| 13:33:52 | sean-k-mooney | os maybe moving to irc.libera.chat i guess although we will have to see how the topic plays out in the mailing list | |
| 13:36:32 | kashyap | Yeah; this whole episode seems bizarre | |
| 13:36:32 | kashyap | Yeah; this whole episode seems bizarre | |
| 13:41:07 | sean-k-mooney | its not the first time that this type of thing has happened. its similar to the whole mysql vs mariadb split after the sale to oracale. when legal entities assocaited with opensrouce comunities are sold and the aquiring company desides to put there stamp on comunity it can often result in a split | |
| 13:41:07 | sean-k-mooney | its not the first time that this type of thing has happened. its similar to the whole mysql vs mariadb split after the sale to oracale. when legal entities assocaited with opensrouce comunities are sold and the aquiring company desides to put there stamp on comunity it can often result in a split | |
| 13:42:23 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: in this case it sound liek the new ownwer of freenode LTD wanted to moitise it in some way and as a result the people that actully ran it but were not employees rightly dont want to have there work or the comunity monitised | |
| 13:42:23 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: in this case it sound liek the new ownwer of freenode LTD wanted to moitise it in some way and as a result the people that actully ran it but were not employees rightly dont want to have there work or the comunity monitised | |
| 13:44:08 | sean-k-mooney | reading between the lines there is also privacy concerns and perhaps lawful intercept or us law eleemnt to this too | |
| 13:44:08 | sean-k-mooney | reading between the lines there is also privacy concerns and perhaps lawful intercept or us law eleemnt to this too | |
| 13:49:57 | kashyap | I see. I haven't read their story in full, but it's annoying | |
| 13:49:57 | kashyap | I see. I haven't read their story in full, but it's annoying | |
| 14:24:36 | alexe9191 | Good day everyone:) . A while ago i had an issue with the nova scheduler in rocky and I was advised to use the placement api instead of filters. However, we are depending on the instance extra specs aggregate filter to match certain hosts properties. Like for instance, SSD. | |
| 14:24:37 | alexe9191 | Good day everyone:) . A while ago i had an issue with the nova scheduler in rocky and I was advised to use the placement api instead of filters. However, we are depending on the instance extra specs aggregate filter to match certain hosts properties. Like for instance, SSD. | |
| 14:24:59 | alexe9191 | I am wondering if such an option is available for placement? and if so, how to configure nova to use it? it's not clear in the documentation. | |
| 14:24:59 | alexe9191 | I am wondering if such an option is available for placement? and if so, how to configure nova to use it? it's not clear in the documentation. | |
| 14:31:03 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: there is a replacemnt yes | |
| 14:31:03 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: there is a replacemnt yes | |
| 14:31:24 | sean-k-mooney | https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/isolate-aggregates.html | |
| 14:31:51 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: its not a direct replacment but it achive the same goal using trait in a slight better way | |
| 14:31:51 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: its not a direct replacment but it achive the same goal using trait in a slight better way | |
| 14:32:24 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: i say its not a direct replacment because you need update your flaovrs | |
| 14:32:24 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: i say its not a direct replacment because you need update your flaovrs | |
| 14:33:35 | alexe9191 | I am assuming I also need to update the hosts one by one to add that trait to each resource class? | |
| 14:33:35 | alexe9191 | I am assuming I also need to update the hosts one by one to add that trait to each resource class? | |
| 14:34:09 | alexe9191 | and also update the flavor to use trait instead of for instance hw:cpu_policy='dedicated' ? | |
| 14:34:09 | alexe9191 | and also update the flavor to use trait instead of for instance hw:cpu_policy='dedicated' ? | |
| 14:34:21 | alexe9191 | or quota:disk_write? something like that | |
| 14:34:22 | alexe9191 | or quota:disk_write? something like that | |
| 14:36:03 | sean-k-mooney | no you would have to create a new flavor with the trait e.g. traits:CUSTOM_SSD=required as an extra spec | |
| 14:36:03 | sean-k-mooney | no you would have to create a new flavor with the trait e.g. traits:CUSTOM_SSD=required as an extra spec | |
| 14:36:11 | sean-k-mooney | the resize the instance to use that trait | |
| 14:36:11 | sean-k-mooney | the resize the instance to use that trait | |
| 14:38:42 | alexe9191 | but that trait need to be saved to the hypervisor provider, correct? or would it be inherited from the aggregate the host is sitting in? | |
| 14:38:42 | alexe9191 | but that trait need to be saved to the hypervisor provider, correct? or would it be inherited from the aggregate the host is sitting in? | |
| 14:39:20 | alexe9191 | Creating new flavors it not the issue. I am wondering if I have to update 800x hypervisors with the new CUSTOM_SSD trait and all other custom traits that i need? | |
| 14:39:20 | alexe9191 | Creating new flavors it not the issue. I am wondering if I have to update 800x hypervisors with the new CUSTOM_SSD trait and all other custom traits that i need? | |
| 14:40:23 | alexe9191 | ah I see. I think you can add the trait to the aggregate as well? | |
| 14:40:23 | alexe9191 | ah I see. I think you can add the trait to the aggregate as well? | |
| 14:40:33 | sean-k-mooney | you add it to the aggreate yes | |
| 14:40:33 | sean-k-mooney | you add it to the aggreate yes | |
| 14:40:56 | sean-k-mooney | you do also have to add it too the compute node RP | |
| 14:40:57 | sean-k-mooney | you do also have to add it too the compute node RP | |
| 14:41:26 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: traits live on the resouce provider not the invetories | |
| 14:41:26 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: traits live on the resouce provider not the invetories | |
| 14:41:52 | sean-k-mooney | so you woudl put CUSTOM_SSD on all the compute nodes with an SSD | |
| 14:41:53 | sean-k-mooney | so you woudl put CUSTOM_SSD on all the compute nodes with an SSD | |
| 14:42:19 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: you can continue to use the old filter by the way | |
| 14:42:19 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: you can continue to use the old filter by the way | |
| 14:42:44 | alexe9191 | ah the --property in the flavor you mean? that would be translated to a trait? | |
| 14:42:44 | alexe9191 | ah the --property in the flavor you mean? that would be translated to a trait? | |
| 14:42:59 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: no | |
| 14:42:59 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: no | |
| 14:43:05 | sean-k-mooney | so there are two ways to do it sorry | |
| 14:43:05 | sean-k-mooney | so there are two ways to do it sorry | |
| 14:43:26 | sean-k-mooney | you can tag your flavor with a requried trait and tag each host rp with the custome trait | |
| 14:43:26 | sean-k-mooney | you can tag your flavor with a requried trait and tag each host rp with the custome trait | |
| 14:43:34 | sean-k-mooney | or you can use aggreates https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/isolate-aggregates.html | |
| 14:43:34 | sean-k-mooney | or you can use aggreates https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/isolate-aggregates.html | |
| 14:44:19 | alexe9191 | I'd actually rather use the aggregates because that means i don't have to update each host and also update each new host. The documentation is however very confusing. | |
| 14:44:19 | alexe9191 | I'd actually rather use the aggregates because that means i don't have to update each host and also update each new host. The documentation is however very confusing. | |
| 14:44:31 | sean-k-mooney | you stil need to update each host | |
| 14:44:31 | sean-k-mooney | you stil need to update each host | |
| 14:44:45 | sean-k-mooney | so there are 3 parts | |
| 14:44:45 | sean-k-mooney | so there are 3 parts | |
| 14:45:00 | sean-k-mooney | first you update the hosts rescoue providers to have the custom tratis | |
| 14:45:00 | sean-k-mooney | first you update the hosts rescoue providers to have the custom tratis | |
| 14:45:14 | sean-k-mooney | second you update the image or flavor to requrest the requred trait | |
| 14:45:14 | sean-k-mooney | second you update the image or flavor to requrest the requred trait | |
| 14:45:50 | sean-k-mooney | third you enabel the placment prefilter and update the aggrate to enforace that only instance that request a given trait can land on that aggrate | |
| 14:45:50 | sean-k-mooney | third you enabel the placment prefilter and update the aggrate to enforace that only instance that request a given trait can land on that aggrate | |
| 14:46:24 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: when you add a tarit to a host you can land on that host if you request it or not | |
| 14:46:24 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: when you add a tarit to a host you can land on that host if you request it or not | |
| 14:46:45 | sean-k-mooney | when you add a trait to the image or flavor as required you will guarentte that you willl land on a host with that trait | |
| 14:46:45 | sean-k-mooney | when you add a trait to the image or flavor as required you will guarentte that you willl land on a host with that trait | |
| 14:46:57 | alexe9191 | I thought the placement prefilter was enabled by default? do I need to explicitly enable it? | |
| 14:46:58 | alexe9191 | I thought the placement prefilter was enabled by default? do I need to explicitly enable it? | |
| 14:47:11 | sean-k-mooney | when you add the required trait to the aggreate you will guarentee you will only land in that aggreate if you asked for the requited trait | |
| 14:47:11 | sean-k-mooney | when you add the required trait to the aggreate you will guarentee you will only land in that aggreate if you asked for the requited trait | |
| 14:47:31 | sean-k-mooney | alexe9191: its disable by default so you have to enable it yes | |