| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-05-10 | |||
| 09:34:02 | gibi | then we can settle the whole thing | |
| 09:35:59 | sean-k-mooney | i have a multi node devstack | |
| 09:36:09 | sean-k-mooney | ill quickly create some azs and boot some vms | |
| 09:36:10 | bauzas | me too but I have gym | |
| 09:38:01 | sean-k-mooney | ill update the etherpad | |
| 09:44:14 | gibi | I quickly checked if booted without AZ then unshelved to nova AZ then the RequestSpec was updated from null to nova | |
| 09:44:19 | bauzas | I like gibi's etherpad, short to read | |
| 09:44:38 | bauzas | gibi: :/ | |
| 09:56:01 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: just confirming my self but ok i guess we need to decied if we also want to change unshelve to az as part fo this micoverion | |
| 10:10:22 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: so assuming we all agree that we should change the behavior for unshleve to az with no az in boot the request spec initally | |
| 10:10:38 | sean-k-mooney | can you add 2 tables to the spec | |
| 10:10:56 | sean-k-mooney | 1 with the existing behavior for all the cases in gibis etherpad and then a second with the new behaiovr | |
| 10:11:48 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, yep based on the etherpad table it is clear. Of course I will change the specs with previous and new behavior. | |
| 10:13:48 | sean-k-mooney | i have copied it to my other etherpad and created the updated tables | |
| 10:13:55 | sean-k-mooney | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/unshelve-to-host#L63 | |
| 10:14:13 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ^ | |
| 10:19:02 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, I think table is fine | |
| 10:22:02 | sean-k-mooney | actully there is a conflict | |
| 10:22:18 | sean-k-mooney | so we cant supprot unshlve to any az without a new paramater | |
| 10:26:36 | sean-k-mooney | ill just strick though those lines ot note that we can ignore it | |
| 10:26:41 | sean-k-mooney | if that works for you | |
| 10:28:26 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: so the conflict is that we cannot distinguish between {availability=null} and the {} request? | |
| 10:29:16 | sean-k-mooney | yes | |
| 10:29:32 | sean-k-mooney | well more how to store that delta in the python object | |
| 10:29:59 | sean-k-mooney | as in the request_spec used by the schduler | |
| 10:30:14 | sean-k-mooney | since both woudl have AZ=None | |
| 10:30:18 | gibi | ahh yes | |
| 10:30:37 | gibi | but wait | |
| 10:30:46 | sean-k-mooney | hum | |
| 10:30:48 | sean-k-mooney | would they | |
| 10:30:50 | gibi | do we need to differentiate in the request spec object? not just in the request itself? | |
| 10:31:05 | sean-k-mooney | ya im thinking about that again | |
| 10:31:22 | sean-k-mooney | can we tell the difference between {availability=null} and the {} | |
| 10:31:52 | sean-k-mooney | the the reqested destination object that caries this i guess | |
| 10:32:00 | gibi | the request_spec contains None means no restriction. if the API request contains az=null that means reset what is in the request spec, if the API request contains {} then that means dont change the what is in the request_spec | |
| 10:32:22 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ya that proably would work | |
| 10:32:32 | sean-k-mooney | ok maybe we can add that back | |
| 10:34:43 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: Retry in CellDatabases fixture when global DB state changes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/840949 | |
| 10:38:06 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: Uggla updated the etherpad hopefully that is now correct | |
| 10:38:46 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yep it looks good to me | |
| 10:38:56 | gibi | thanks for trying out all the legacy cases I was sloppy | |
| 10:39:09 | sean-k-mooney | we dont have a way to pin an unpinned guest in this caes | |
| 10:39:19 | sean-k-mooney | unless you use the old microverion | |
| 10:39:41 | sean-k-mooney | is that an issue | |
| 10:41:46 | sean-k-mooney | im going to take a break form this spec for a while but ill come back to it after Uggla has updated it | |
| 10:43:32 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I agree that pinnin is not possible now but I think that is OK | |
| 10:44:20 | gibi | I remember a lot more questions about unpinning than pinning in the past | |
| 10:44:43 | sean-k-mooney | ya we could always add it later if needed. i think we have enough to update the spec and then we can get bauzas's and dansmith's input to see if they agree | |
| 10:46:14 | gibi | I agree | |
| 11:53:19 | gibi | bauzas: left feedback in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840217 | |
| 12:03:29 | gibi | bauzas: fyi I cannot attend the today's nova meeting | |
| 12:03:32 | gibi | I will read back | |
| 12:26:21 | sean-k-mooney | artom: are you plannign to adress gibi's nits in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841170/3/nova/tests/functional/libvirt/test_evacuate.py or adress them in the follow up change that adressed the issue | |
| 12:35:43 | gibi | artom: left feedback in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840974 | |
| 12:35:50 | opendevreview | Andre Aranha proposed openstack/nova master: Test setting the nova job to centos-9-stream https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/831844 | |
| 12:39:30 | bauzas | gibi: ack, thanks for the spec review and ack for missing the meeting | |
| 12:47:53 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Re-propose allow Project admin to list allowed hypervisors https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/833165 | |
| 12:53:26 | gibi | bauzas: have you thought about abandoning open specs that was not re-proposed to the zed directory yet? It would clean up the open spec query a bit | |
| 12:53:49 | bauzas | gibi: we can do this | |
| 12:54:19 | bauzas | but let's discuss this on the next meeting as you're not there for today | |
| 12:54:31 | gibi | fine by me | |
| 12:54:56 | sean-k-mooney | im ok with abandoing them by the way | |
| 12:55:06 | sean-k-mooney | the owner can unabandone them | |
| 12:55:12 | sean-k-mooney | if they repopose them | |
| 12:55:32 | sean-k-mooney | but we are also not in a rush | |
| 12:55:43 | sean-k-mooney | so im fine to wait to make that desision | |
| 12:57:02 | gibi | it was just a sudden urge to close out the spec bottom third of the https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack%252Fnova-specs+status:open | |
| 12:57:08 | gibi | *specs | |
| 12:58:06 | sean-k-mooney | :) | |
| 13:06:08 | bauzas | but I'll respin https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840974 first | |
| 13:06:17 | gibi | bauzas: thanks, take an extra coffee :) | |
| 13:06:31 | bauzas | oh wait, wrong link | |
| 13:06:35 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: also thanks for the feedback on that one I will go through it | |
| 13:06:44 | bauzas | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840217 | |
| 13:20:47 | artom | gibi, much thanks! So, with that spec, I'd really like for the original customer requesting it to weigh in | |
| 13:21:03 | artom | Since I'm not sure that in its current form it's of any use to them | |
| 13:21:34 | artom | sean-k-mooney, yeah, I can address the nits, I'll need to figure out a fix regardless and push that | |
| 13:26:22 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Allow unshelve to a specific host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/831507 | |
| 13:35:16 | opendevreview | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposes to remove keypair generation https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840217 | |
| 13:36:22 | gibi | artom: ack, does the original requested aware of that we are discussing this in the spec? | |
| 13:36:30 | artom | gibi, yeah, sent them an email | |
| 13:36:38 | gibi | artom: cool then | |
| 13:36:41 | artom | And they previously commented on the Neutron bug | |
| 13:37:01 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: i think to adress the orginaly requester usecase we would need to add a --domain parmater to nova boot | |
| 13:37:37 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: is it about having one single domain per instance or domain per port? | |
| 13:37:39 | sean-k-mooney | and then updated hostname and local_hostname to be the full fQDN in the metadata | |
| 13:37:56 | sean-k-mooney | they want /etc/hostname to end up with the FQDN | |
| 13:38:08 | sean-k-mooney | so single per vm | |
| 13:38:10 | gibi | OK, I see, so one single domain per instance | |
| 13:38:13 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 13:38:31 | gibi | then I agree that the current spec is going to a different direction | |
| 13:38:41 | sean-k-mooney | so to me if we want to do that we need to have that be a paramter to the nova boot command | |
| 13:38:59 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: the issue is they wanted use to backport this which we obvioulsy cant do | |
| 13:39:06 | sean-k-mooney | if its a new api parmater | |
| 13:40:04 | sean-k-mooney | so what i would like to see is as folows. we add --domain, when passed we set hostname to instnace.hostname+instance.domain when not set instance.hostname is the sanadised hostname as we have today | |
| 13:40:17 | sean-k-mooney | in addtion to that we generate the per port host name using the values from neutron | |
| 13:40:49 | sean-k-mooney | when we pass --domain if neutron has the per-domain extension | |
| 13:41:04 | sean-k-mooney | then if nova creates a port then we should set the port domain to the value they passed | |
| 13:41:49 | sean-k-mooney | if we do that then you can set a default domain for an instance as part of nova boot for any ports created by nova and that will propaget via the metadta api and be sent to neutron/designate | |
| 13:42:16 | sean-k-mooney | if you precreate the ports then we will use the value of the domain form the network or port in the metadta | |