| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-12-03 | |||
| 12:08:24 | opendevreview | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Create qcow2 disks with the correct size without extending https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/779275 | |
| 12:08:53 | opendevreview | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: nova-next: Drop NOVA_USE_SERVICE_TOKEN from subnode https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/816740 | |
| 12:09:05 | opendevreview | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: nova-next: Deploy noVNC from source instead of packages https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/816738 | |
| 12:09:27 | lyarwood | ^ just rebasing various things that are ready for review if cores have time | |
| 13:28:53 | opendevreview | Gabriel Silva Trevisan proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Set resize claim resource when changing host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820381 | |
| 15:36:13 | rloo | behaviour? (https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/commit/7670303aabe16d1d7c25e411d7bd413aee7fdcf3/nova/compute/api.py#L3640) | |
| 15:36:13 | rloo | Hi, we have some downstream info that we put in nova server's metadata (via --property) when doing a create or rebulid. I didn't see anything explicit about this so wanted to confirm. In the rebuild, if any metadata was explicitly specified as part of the rebuild command, that metadata replaces the server's metadata, so eg keys specified in the create that weren't explicitly specified in the rebuild, are gone. Is that the expected | |
| 16:49:35 | gmann | gibi: thanks | |
| 17:07:00 | sean-k-mooney | rloo: i dont think rebuild allows updating metadta it only allows updateing user-data | |
| 17:07:04 | sean-k-mooney | they are not the same thing | |
| 17:08:19 | sean-k-mooney | so if you use --property to update teh instance metadata the isntance metadata shoudl still be preserved but an image metadtaa will be updated form the new image and that will replace it | |
| 17:08:36 | sean-k-mooney | and if you speciy new user data on rebuild that shoudl also update the user data | |
| 17:08:47 | rloo | i'm interested in the instance metadata, not the user data. | |
| 17:09:52 | sean-k-mooney | hum it looks like metadta can be inclded in teh rebuild instance action https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=rebuild-server-rebuild-action-detail#rebuild-server-rebuild-action | |
| 17:10:23 | sean-k-mooney | i would expect that to replace all metadta if specifed | |
| 17:10:45 | sean-k-mooney | i would conder it a bug if it only did a partila update | |
| 17:10:49 | sean-k-mooney | which behavior are you seing | |
| 17:10:55 | rloo | i believe the userdata part is correct. but the code that handles metadata looks like it replaces the server's metadata (wahtever was there), with metadata specified in the rebuild. i didn't test, but i think eg 'openstack server create myinstance --property foo=atcreate', then 'openstack server rebuild myinstance --property bar=atrebuild', the server will only have property 'bar=atrebuild'. | |
| 17:11:24 | sean-k-mooney | rloo: well full replacemnt not partil update is what i would expect | |
| 17:11:57 | rloo | so what you describe is what I see. why do you expect full replacement? (my mental model is diff so want to grok) | |
| 17:13:18 | sean-k-mooney | well partly because this is a post/put not a patch then openstack apis generally do not support a paritl update approch | |
| 17:13:39 | sean-k-mooney | it would be strange if this api did when the othere are typicaly a full replacemnt | |
| 17:13:40 | rloo | from user/my point of view, I don't know why i'd want to specify all the properties at rebuild. eg if no properties are specified at rebuild, i get the properties from create. if i specify one property value at rebuild, that wipes out all the properties at create. | |
| 17:14:06 | sean-k-mooney | rloo: well if you do a merge it wont be idompoented as it will depend on the existing state | |
| 17:14:24 | sean-k-mooney | the real question is what do we do it you do not specify it | |
| 17:15:01 | rloo | if no property is specified in the rebuild command, the existing properties are used. | |
| 17:15:17 | sean-k-mooney | ok so that is where the discontinuty might arise | |
| 17:15:56 | sean-k-mooney | we are effectily calling https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=replace-metadata-items-detail#replace-metadata-items | |
| 17:16:29 | sean-k-mooney | rloo: your expection is that we woudl iterate over teh item and only update them | |
| 17:16:34 | rloo | I don't use the --key-name thing, but I am guessing that is similar behaviour? if one key pair is specified in the rebuild, any existing key pairs are gone? | |
| 17:16:40 | sean-k-mooney | but then you could not remove metadta on rebuild only modify or add | |
| 17:16:46 | sean-k-mooney | with the current approch you can do both | |
| 17:16:47 | rloo | yes, that's my expectation. that the new value for key is used. | |
| 17:17:10 | sean-k-mooney | so as the api is today that is not how its ment to work | |
| 17:17:16 | rloo | new value for the specified property (key) is used. | |
| 17:17:27 | sean-k-mooney | we would losue functionality if we change it without adding a way to remove keys | |
| 17:18:12 | rloo | well, one can set/unset via 'openstack server set', 'openstack server unset' | |
| 17:18:40 | sean-k-mooney | yep which would be a valid way to achive your goa | |
| 17:18:47 | sean-k-mooney | rebuidl with current metadata and then update | |
| 17:19:26 | sean-k-mooney | the alterniive is get the meddtata, update it client side and pass the desired state to rebuidl | |
| 17:19:40 | rloo | except that we (downstream) need the values for the rebuild operation itself. and our users don't think they have to set them if they've already set them. they just want to change one of the properties/metadata fields. | |
| 17:20:21 | rloo | i can do a downstream patch for this, just wanted to grok what the upstream/intent was, to figure out if we need to carry this patch downstream forever or not. | |
| 17:20:40 | sean-k-mooney | which downsteam? | |
| 17:21:01 | rloo | or force our users to explicitly specify all the property values in the rebuild command. or have them specify via the 'set' command, then do a rebuild w/o specifying any. | |
| 17:21:02 | sean-k-mooney | this is not something we would backprot in redhat for example in osp as it a breaking api change | |
| 17:21:20 | rloo | yahoo downstream. | |
| 17:21:22 | sean-k-mooney | rloo: to change this we would need a spec and new api microverion | |
| 17:21:57 | sean-k-mooney | in that version we would likel add a second filed to allow specifying if the metadta was replaced or updated | |
| 17:22:29 | sean-k-mooney | in the short term forcing users to speciy all the metadta is the way to work around it | |
| 17:22:39 | sean-k-mooney | or do the metadta update first | |
| 17:22:41 | sean-k-mooney | then rebuild | |
| 17:22:44 | rloo | well, it seems like what you describe is the intent (vs a bug). i have other things i'd like upstreamed that are more important/useful than this I think so going to hack for now :) Thx for explaining! | |
| 17:23:26 | sean-k-mooney | no porblem. this likely would be a simple thing to add in that its only a singel new filed | |
| 17:23:33 | sean-k-mooney | and fairly self contained | |
| 17:23:44 | sean-k-mooney | but sicne its an api change ti requires a spec. | |
| 17:23:48 | opendevreview | Gustavo Santos proposed openstack/nova master: Reattach mdevs to guest on resume https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/815373 | |
| 17:23:55 | sean-k-mooney | if you decied to file one feel freee to ping me and ill review | |
| 17:24:29 | rloo | thx sean-k-mooney! | |
| 17:24:47 | sean-k-mooney | rloo: looking at the api verions history i dont see this refernce https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/api-microversion-history.html so i suspect this is from our pre 2.1 api | |
| 17:26:02 | sean-k-mooney | i would proably add "metadata_update_method: replace|merge|clear" if i was to extend the api | |
| 17:29:54 | opendevreview | Gabriel Silva Trevisan proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Set resize claim resource when changing host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820381 | |
| 17:30:46 | rloo | sean-k-mooney: it seems to me that i'd want to modify/enhance the existing rebuild API: https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=rebuild-server-rebuild-action-detail#rebuild-server-rebuild-action | |
| 17:33:17 | sean-k-mooney | rloo: yes | |
| 17:34:17 | sean-k-mooney | enhance it so you can specify how the metadat is process by addin ga metadata_update_method or some other enhacsement so you can opt into the merge behavior | |
| 17:34:43 | sean-k-mooney | or even make that the default for the new microversion and allow opting in to the replace behavior | |
| 17:35:05 | sean-k-mooney | but we need a microversion to ensure we do not break clients | |
| 17:35:17 | sean-k-mooney | that rely on the current behavior | |
| 17:38:28 | rloo | thx sean-k-mooney, I'll keep that in mind! | |
| 18:22:02 | opendevreview | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: conf: Allow cinderclient and os_brick to independently log at DEBUG https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820399 | |
| 18:33:32 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Ignore exception.CPUUnpinningInvalid when deleting https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820401 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2021-12-06 | |||
| 08:55:39 | gibi | good morning Nova | |
| 09:05:04 | lyarwood | Morning | |
| 09:21:47 | bauzas | good morning | |
| 10:12:54 | opendevreview | Ilya Popov proposed openstack/nova master: Fix to use NUMA cell with free resources first https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/805649 | |
| 10:17:37 | opendevreview | Ilya Popov proposed openstack/nova master: Fix to use NUMA cell with free resources first https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/805649 | |
| 10:21:24 | opendevreview | Ilya Popov proposed openstack/nova master: Fix to implement 'pack' or 'spread' VM's NUMA cells https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/805649 | |
| 13:28:56 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [DNM] using druable queue in rabit https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820523 | |
| 14:26:42 | opendevreview | Ilya Popov proposed openstack/nova master: Fix to implement 'pack' or 'spread' VM's NUMA cells https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/805649 | |
| 14:31:39 | opendevreview | Jan Hartkopf proposed openstack/nova-specs master: update userdata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/816542 | |
| 14:53:58 | opendevreview | Pierre Libeau proposed openstack/nova master: Nova resize don't extend disk in one specific case https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820531 | |
| 14:58:05 | opendevreview | Jan Hartkopf proposed openstack/nova-specs master: update userdata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/816542 | |
| 15:01:00 | opendevreview | Gustavo Santos proposed openstack/nova master: Reattach mdevs to guest on resume https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/815373 | |
| 15:21:01 | opendevreview | Jan Hartkopf proposed openstack/nova-specs master: update userdata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/816542 | |
| 15:39:25 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug 1953359 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820540 | |
| 15:39:34 | gibi | yet another race condition ^^ | |
| 16:15:51 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: [rt] Apply migration context for incoming migrations https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820549 | |
| 16:15:57 | gibi | and a fix ^^ | |
| 16:20:08 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: Reproduce bug 1953359 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820550 | |
| 16:21:21 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: [rt] Apply migration context for incoming migrations https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820553 | |
| 16:22:33 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Reproduce bug 1953359 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820554 | |
| 16:23:45 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: [rt] Apply migration context for incoming migrations https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820555 | |
| 16:24:57 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: Reproduce bug 1953359 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820558 | |
| 16:26:09 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: [rt] Apply migration context for incoming migrations https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820559 | |
| 16:39:35 | opendevreview | Jan Hartkopf proposed openstack/nova-specs master: update userdata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/816542 | |
| 18:59:55 | opendevreview | Gabriel Silva Trevisan proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Set resize claim resource when changing host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820381 | |
| 21:38:52 | opendevreview | Gabriel Silva Trevisan proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Set resize claim resource when changing host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820381 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2021-12-07 | |||
| 08:24:46 | gibi | melwitt: thanks for noticing that https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820381 and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/820549 are related | |
| 08:24:56 | gibi | I left comments in the former | |
| 08:25:14 | gibi | We need to figure out which direction is better | |
| 08:25:37 | gibi | bauzas: you could also be interested in ^^ | |