| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-07-13 | |||
| 16:45:56 | dansmith | lyarwood: copying, yes, but that's not what I mean | |
| 16:46:00 | lyarwood | sean-k-mooney: dropping rbd just for Glance AFAICT | |
| 16:46:14 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: is ^ the case | |
| 16:46:26 | dansmith | lyarwood: I meant tell nova "specifically create a flattened snapshot and upload it to a specific glance backend" | |
| 16:46:45 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: that i think would be useful in other cases too | |
| 16:47:00 | dansmith | lyarwood: I don't think glance really exposes parent-child relationships anyway, so you couldn't expect to copy/move a hierarchy between backends | |
| 16:47:01 | sean-k-mooney | adding a glance store parater to the snapshot api i think woudl be resonable | |
| 16:47:03 | dansmith | either way, | |
| 16:47:14 | alistarle | So you think it is better to change the snapshot API to allow users to choose which glance backend to use to snap the image ? | |
| 16:47:14 | dansmith | I think it's quite clear that this can't be a specless bp :) | |
| 16:47:35 | alistarle | Yeah I see you point, for sure it will require a spec in that case | |
| 16:47:46 | dansmith | alistarle: that's not what I was suggesting, although that might also be an option.. the problem is, many ops will *not* want users to choose the pathologically terrible option, which you seem to want :) | |
| 16:48:10 | alistarle | But actually we will need to do the same code, so if a user explicitly specify a glance store, we need to bypass the direct_snapshot process | |
| 16:48:11 | dansmith | I was suggesting a conf option for nova-compute to tell it "always snapshot to glance backend X" or something | |
| 16:48:34 | dansmith | instead of letting a user choose | |
| 16:48:54 | alistarle | Because as of now, rbd image_backend do not care about glance config, he will magically decide to use ceph because VM disk is stored in ceph | |
| 16:49:08 | sean-k-mooney | i kind of dislike doing this per host but i guess a host level config might be useful for an edge deployment | |
| 16:49:55 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: correct although that is partly be desgin | |
| 16:50:01 | alistarle | Oh I see, so instead of putting a config option to "disable direct snapshot", we put an option to "choose a glance backend" | |
| 16:50:27 | alistarle | And if we specify this option, we skip the direct_snapshot to always call glance | |
| 16:50:37 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: well not nessisarly | |
| 16:50:48 | sean-k-mooney | if the specifed backedn was ceph | |
| 16:51:03 | sean-k-mooney | then direct would stil make sense | |
| 16:51:03 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: letting users choose the backend on snapshot will mean they try all kinds of things that won't work or are terrible for performance | |
| 16:51:06 | sean-k-mooney | if the vm was backed by that ceph cluster | |
| 16:51:14 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: like a user who is currently on ceph always choosing the file backend, causing us to always flatten and upload when we shouldn't be | |
| 16:51:43 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: yes although i was wondiering if people woudl want to do that for data reducnace reasons | |
| 16:52:17 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. normally backup to local edge site with a snapshot and ocationally do it to central site | |
| 16:52:31 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: I mean, it would be nice, but I think we'd need policy, defaults, and some sort of way to know which ones the compute can even talk to | |
| 16:52:48 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: yeah, but not backup from one edge site to another.. that would be terribad | |
| 16:52:58 | dansmith | so we'd have to have some mapping of who can do what, etc | |
| 16:53:13 | sean-k-mooney | ya which is not realy somethng a normal user woudl be aware off | |
| 16:53:20 | dansmith | for sure | |
| 16:53:34 | sean-k-mooney | so we have 2 pothtial host level cofnig options | |
| 16:53:49 | sean-k-mooney | disableing direct snapshto whihc to me feels more like a workaround option | |
| 16:53:58 | sean-k-mooney | and dansmith's glance backend option | |
| 16:54:13 | sean-k-mooney | *glance store | |
| 16:54:43 | dansmith | yup.. the former is a workaround for sure, and as we've noted here, hard to even grok what or why you'd want it, | |
| 16:54:52 | sean-k-mooney | im a little concerned the host level glance store option will have implications for shelve and cross cell migration | |
| 16:55:08 | dansmith | but the latter is at least useful for migrating in or out of some thing, or directing snapshots to an appropriate on- or off-site location depending | |
| 16:55:32 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: well, whatever the default is today already does, AFAIK | |
| 16:55:51 | sean-k-mooney | i do think i prefer the store approch | |
| 16:56:06 | sean-k-mooney | ya fair we just assume that glance is accable everywhere | |
| 16:56:17 | gibi | we have 5 minutes left, is there any other topic today? if not the we can continue this of course | |
| 16:56:27 | dansmith | spec on this for sure tho | |
| 16:56:49 | gibi | the spec it is | |
| 16:56:53 | gibi | then | |
| 16:57:07 | gibi | alistarle: please note that we have spec freeze on Thursday for Xena | |
| 16:57:32 | lyarwood | Quick one from me, I'm out for the next ~2 or so weeks, stephenfin is babysitting some stuff while I'm gone. | |
| 16:57:48 | gibi | lyarwood: thanks for the headsup | |
| 16:58:27 | gibi | if nothing else for today, then I will close the meeting but you can continue discussing the snapshot issue | |
| 16:59:18 | gibi | than thanks for joining | |
| 16:59:21 | opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Jul 13 16:59:21 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 16:59:21 | gibi | #endmeeting | |
| 16:59:21 | opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2021/nova.2021-07-13-16.00.log.html | |
| 16:59:21 | opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2021/nova.2021-07-13-16.00.txt | |
| 16:59:21 | opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2021/nova.2021-07-13-16.00.html | |
| 17:14:49 | alistarle | Sorry guy's I just miss the end of the meeting | |
| 17:15:13 | melwitt | gibi: ack re: the consumer type spec, I'm happy to propose it in the placement repo, either way, lmk what you think | |
| 17:15:21 | alistarle | So if I understand well I need to write a spec for that and freeze is Thursday, so it is dead for Xena right ? | |
| 17:15:27 | melwitt | stephenfin: ack, will look at the update on your patch | |
| 17:19:53 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: it would be challanging to land by thursday yes | |
| 17:20:13 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: i would still suggest working on the spec and a poc of the implementaiton | |
| 17:20:28 | sean-k-mooney | but likely it would be a yoga change at this point | |
| 17:21:35 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: im not sure if dansmith woudl agree but i could maybe see adding a [workarounds]disable_direct_snapshot=True|False config option as a bug in xena | |
| 17:22:06 | dansmith | zI dunno, | |
| 17:22:13 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: but i think as a long term feature it would need a spec and that likely cant land in xena | |
| 17:22:24 | dansmith | I was having a hard time seeing the value, and clearly lyarwood was as well | |
| 17:22:41 | dansmith | it's definitely a workaround, but doesn't really fit what the workarounds conf section was supposed to be | |
| 17:23:05 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: so am i in that apprcoh but as a workaround option we could remvoe it in a sort period of time | |
| 17:23:13 | dansmith | I think I'd rather see it done as a generally-useful thing to avoid landing the workaround and then never closing on it | |
| 17:23:23 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i think we have a similar workaroud alredy | |
| 17:23:26 | alistarle | Actually it is not really an issue for me to see it in Yoga if it need more work, my only concern is if I need to wait 6 month to work on it | |
| 17:23:29 | sean-k-mooney | for live snapshots | |
| 17:23:46 | dansmith | alistarle: you can work on it now, just don't expect to merge before Y opens | |
| 17:23:47 | sean-k-mooney | https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#workarounds.disable_libvirt_livesnapshot | |
| 17:24:21 | alistarle | Oh I see, there is a dedicated workaround section | |
| 17:24:37 | alistarle | But does the workaround section follow the same deprecation cycle than others ? | |
| 17:24:39 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: on no you would not need to wait 6 months | |
| 17:24:42 | lyarwood | I'd be happy with another workaround to disable_live_directsnapshot with this replacement approach being worked on in Y | |
| 17:25:10 | sean-k-mooney | we have actully just created the yoga spec folder | |
| 17:25:54 | sean-k-mooney | so you could actully submit a spec to that folder for next cycle which we coudl review, and then you could work on the implemation to merge in early y | |
| 17:26:27 | sean-k-mooney | althoguh we normally dont approve specs for the next release until later in the cycle | |
| 17:26:59 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: yes workaround follow the same dperecation cycle | |
| 17:27:18 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: although we have in the passed intoduced workarounds as deprecated imidetly | |
| 17:27:26 | dansmith | if alistarle is fine with Y, then why not do it just once, in Y? | |
| 17:29:09 | alistarle | Actually I don't really care about when it will be officially released, as I can backport my commit easily, I just hope we can freeze the implementation as soon as possible, so I will not backport a different commit in the future | |
| 17:29:11 | lyarwood | If there's no pressing need in some env then yeah | |
| 17:29:32 | sean-k-mooney | alistarle: you mean backprot downstream/out of tree | |
| 17:29:41 | alistarle | Yeah exactly | |
| 17:30:06 | sean-k-mooney | ok just makeing sure since as a blueprit or spec it would not qualify to backport upstream | |
| 17:30:40 | sean-k-mooney | then can i suggest you submit a spec agaisnt the yoga specs directory and we can review it with Y in mind | |
| 17:31:09 | alistarle | Ok fine, let's go for Y then, and dive the "glance store" option in nova_compute config then | |
| 17:31:32 | sean-k-mooney | +1 | |
| 17:35:40 | opendevreview | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: WIP/DNM nova-manage: Introduce bdm show and refresh commands https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/800634 | |
| 17:36:30 | lyarwood | stephenfin: ^ dumped some example output, need to help with bedtime then I'll try to clean the spec up this evening before I drop | |
| 18:01:00 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Make test_archive_task_logs deterministic https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/800313 | |
| 18:16:22 | stephenfin | melwitt: Could you also look at https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/794007/4 ? lyarwood is happy with it now | |
| 18:18:13 | melwitt | stephenfin: ah, cool, I had been waiting for his ack. will do | |
| 18:25:32 | opendevreview | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: WIP/DNM libvirt: register device bus and model image properties https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/800708 | |