| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-09-20 | |||
| 09:30:32 | zigo | I'm used to often do single char patches, this one will be ZERO chars ! :0 | |
| 09:32:03 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: technially master is now yoga, which is why we need the bug for backporting and if we want to do an RC2 | |
| 09:32:25 | sean-k-mooney | if you saw this last week before we created RC1 we proably could have just merged it | |
| 09:33:50 | zigo | sean-k-mooney: Ok, thanks for letting me know. Should I wait until my first patch is merged before opening the backport PR ? | |
| 09:34:25 | sean-k-mooney | am we should jsut be able to cherry pick this via the api so i think its safe to do it now | |
| 09:34:26 | zigo | Oh also, is there anything to know from the user's point of view about the sqla-migrate -> alembic switch? | |
| 09:34:47 | zigo | Or is it fully transparent? | |
| 09:34:48 | sean-k-mooney | i dont expect this to take long to review given its size :) | |
| 09:34:59 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: well other then the packageing impact no | |
| 09:35:11 | zigo | Ok, cheers. | |
| 09:35:27 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. the nova-mange command is still the same but you obvioulsy need alembic installed | |
| 09:38:45 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: ok that has the flags and marked it as critical since it blocks packaging https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1944111 | |
| 09:41:29 | zigo | The stable/xena branch is missing a defaultbranch=stable/rocky in the .gitreview file no ? | |
| 09:42:22 | gibi | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809759 | |
| 09:42:54 | gibi | the setup of stable/xena is not fully done yet as RC1 and the branch was cut last Friday | |
| 09:43:23 | zigo | Ok, so I guess I must wait for that one to merge ... :/ | |
| 09:45:56 | gibi | lyarwood, bauzas, elodilles: you you look at https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:create-xena+project:openstack/nova ? | |
| 09:46:06 | gibi | s/you/could/ | |
| 09:47:58 | lyarwood | Yup happy to | |
| 09:50:56 | bauzas | gibi: +Wd | |
| 09:51:57 | bauzas | fwiw, also +wd https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809761/1 and the above one | |
| 09:52:05 | bauzas | so we will have the xena release notes | |
| 09:52:44 | bauzas | we miss a second core on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809762 | |
| 09:52:55 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: Fix the wrong exception used to retry detach API calls https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809934 | |
| 09:53:08 | gibi | bauzas: done | |
| 09:53:24 | bauzas | https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/nova+owner:infra-root%2540openstack.org+is:open shows me all the xena paperwork for our jobs and reno are done | |
| 09:53:29 | bauzas | gibi: thanks | |
| 09:53:43 | bauzas | zigo: sorry was taxidriving my daughter from school | |
| 09:55:36 | bauzas | zigo: +Wd your change | |
| 09:56:06 | bauzas | zigo: please provide a backport change for stable/xena too | |
| 09:56:16 | bauzas | so we will create a RC2 | |
| 10:05:26 | gibi | bauzas: after you are back placement also needs care after RC1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/809366 | |
| 10:06:15 | gibi | bauzas: I will look into the lower constraints failre in placemenet stable/xena setup patches, probably that impacts placement master too | |
| 10:07:52 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: [DNM]: Trigger lower-constaints job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/809994 | |
| 10:46:11 | gibi | yepp it seems master lower-constraints also times out in placement too ^^ | |
| 10:46:28 | gibi | will fix it based on how neutron fixed it | |
| 11:19:40 | gibi | lyarwood, stephenfin: is it an RC critical fix https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809934 ? | |
| 11:21:07 | stephenfin | Ah, whoops, probably not (though I'll defer to lyarwood to be sure). I was thinking all bugfixes were fair play right now since we'd branched already /o\ | |
| 11:21:14 | stephenfin | gibi: feel free to pull it back out | |
| 11:21:45 | bauzas | gibi: ack, taxying back my kid but I'll be around in 15 mins | |
| 11:21:48 | lyarwood | I was under the same impression | |
| 11:22:04 | lyarwood | gibi: isn't master open for Yoga now? | |
| 11:22:27 | gibi | I think until the final RC we need to keep master close to stable/xena for any last minute backport | |
| 11:23:04 | lyarwood | that's fair, yeah it isn't critical so feel free to yank it out if you can | |
| 11:23:41 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Fix the wrong exception used to retry detach API calls https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809934 | |
| 11:23:41 | lyarwood | and FWIW I'm not a huge fan of policy we can't enforce in the tooling like this | |
| 11:23:44 | gibi | yanked | |
| 11:23:48 | lyarwood | thanks | |
| 12:07:30 | bauzas | gibi: all placement Xena changes are now +Wd https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/placement+owner:infra-root%2540openstack.org+is:open | |
| 12:07:51 | gibi | bauzas: thanks but lower constraints fix will be still be needed | |
| 12:07:56 | gibi | as the job will time out | |
| 12:08:01 | gibi | I'm working on it | |
| 12:08:17 | bauzas | gibi: ack thanks | |
| 12:08:25 | bauzas | gibi: what is the change ? | |
| 12:08:46 | gibi | lower constraint bump on master first | |
| 12:08:50 | gibi | as it effects master | |
| 12:09:23 | gibi | then we can lament on either we bump lower on stable/xena too, or look into somehow pinning setuptools version on stable branches | |
| 12:10:01 | gibi | the thing is that we dont pin setuptools coming from virtualenv package on stable so we use basically the latest on every stable | |
| 12:10:40 | gibi | an the latest setuptools removed support for some features old packages are depends on | |
| 12:10:55 | bauzas | (14:08:46) gibi: lower constraint bump on master first | |
| 12:10:58 | bauzas | can't see it | |
| 12:11:03 | gibi | haven't proposed yet | |
| 12:11:09 | bauzas | oh ok | |
| 12:11:15 | gibi | 14:08 < gibi> I'm working on it | |
| 12:11:16 | gibi | 14:08 < gibi> I'm working on it | |
| 12:11:20 | gibi | 14:08 < gibi> I'm working on it | |
| 12:11:24 | gibi | ups | |
| 12:11:26 | gibi | sorry | |
| 12:15:16 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Bump min decorator to 4.0.0 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/810001 | |
| 12:15:23 | gibi | bauzas: now here it is | |
| 12:15:28 | bauzas | gibi: heh sorry | |
| 12:15:37 | gibi | I was lost couple of hour figuring out what happened | |
| 12:15:53 | gibi | especially as I don't like the ide to bump a lower constraint on stable branch | |
| 12:16:01 | gibi | s/ide/idea/ | |
| 12:16:07 | bauzas | agreed | |
| 12:16:29 | bauzas | taxying | |
| 12:18:23 | gibi | as like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardassian ? :) | |
| 12:18:48 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Update master for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809761 | |
| 12:19:42 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Add Python3 yoga unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809762 | |
| 12:20:20 | gibi | interestingly nova stable/xena is not effected | |
| 12:22:59 | gibi | hm in nova we already have decorator >= 4.1.0 since https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/744506/2/lower-constraints.txt#20 | |
| 12:52:21 | belmoreira | Hi, I need your help to understand if I'm missing something in the new vnc configuration | |
| 12:52:29 | belmoreira | I can finally move nova to "train" release and I'm digging again into the vncproxy changes that were introduced by this time. The vncproxy does now the token validation from the cell DB. In stein I'm running with "workarounds/enable_consoleauth" | |
| 12:53:02 | belmoreira | Currently, I have the same vncproxy for all cells. Means that the user gets the same console_url and I only need to open 1 port in the firewall. Also, haproxy configuration is trivial | |
| 12:53:16 | belmoreira | With the new arch, the console_url needs to be redirected to the vncproxy of the cell for the token validation | |
| 12:53:42 | belmoreira | This means that deployments with a large number of cells need to be creative in the way they expose the different console_urls (per cell) | |
| 12:53:53 | belmoreira | maybe I'm missing something something here... | |
| 15:11:26 | bauzas | belmoreira: sorry, I saw your pings but I don't know how to help you | |
| 15:18:02 | belmoreira | Hi bauzas. Thanks, to me this new approach seems really heavy for deployments with a lot cells. For now I'm hacking something similar to [1] to not have a vncproxy per cell. | |
| 15:18:10 | belmoreira | [1] https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/0bd61915ee1d96ca339f342a190e395a39afbcf9/nova/api/openstack/compute/console_auth_tokens.py#L42 | |
| 15:18:30 | belmoreira | maybe we can discuss this in the PTG | |
| 15:26:51 | dansmith | it seems strange to me that someone with lots of cells would want to *not* shard that service across cells | |
| 15:27:04 | dansmith | especially with geo-distributed cells | |
| 15:31:35 | bauzas | agreed with dansmith | |
| 15:31:45 | dansmith | (he dropped) | |
| 15:32:04 | bauzas | hah, my internal meeting trampled this discussion | |
| 15:32:25 | bauzas | -ETOOMANYMEETINHS | |
| 15:32:29 | bauzas | :) | |
| 15:57:20 | kashyap | bauzas: Drop the needless ones on the floor like hot potatoes. And embrace JOMO (joy of missing out) | |
| 15:59:06 | bauzas | hah | |