| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-01-04 | |||
| 16:24:32 | sean-k-mooney[m] | that makes testing simpler | |
| 16:35:18 | opendevreview | Pierre-Samuel Le Stang proposed openstack/nova master: Correctly reset instance task state in rebooting hard https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867832 | |
| 17:51:52 | danzelius | Hey there, I have some old instances I wan't to live-migrate. They used flavors which had some metadata assigned like "highmem: True". The scheduler can't find a host because the AggregateInstanceExtraSpecs-Filter (we included recently) filters them out since the "highmem" key is unscoped. In the nova database I found the instance_extra table and modified the instance in question, removing the extra_specs dict contents....Still the filter tries t | |
| 17:52:20 | danzelius | highmem"-metadata-field. Are there some other places in the db I have forgotten about? I also modified the original-flavor, removing the metadata, still no luck. | |
| 18:15:28 | opendevreview | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova stable/zed: DNM: tetsing tox<4 pin https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869250 | |
| 18:16:25 | opendevreview | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: DNM: tetsing tox<4 pin https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869184 | |
| 18:16:41 | opendevreview | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: DNM: tetsing tox<4 pin https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869185 | |
| 18:16:50 | opendevreview | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: DNM: tetsing tox<4 pin https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869186 | |
| 19:27:39 | opendevreview | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Enable new defaults and scope checks by default https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866218 | |
| 22:29:43 | dansmith | when did we stop being able to -1 specs? | |
| 22:30:04 | dansmith | oh, heh, because this one is merged, lol | |
| 22:30:17 | dansmith | guess I should refresh my tabs from early december | |
| #openstack-nova - 2023-01-05 | |||
| 01:52:34 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add mock to avoid loading guestfs in unit test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/862769 | |
| 02:16:29 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/placement stable/ussuri: placement-status: check only consumers in allocation table https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/840703 | |
| 09:05:40 | sahid | o/ a gentle reminder if it's possible to get eyes on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/858383 ? | |
| 09:30:56 | gibi | good morning | |
| 10:00:19 | Uggla | oh gibi, good morning and happy new year. | |
| 10:00:38 | gibi | Uggla: same to you too | |
| 10:01:42 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Make tox.ini tox 4.0.0 compatible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/868418 | |
| 10:04:37 | gibi | bauzas, gmann: the os-vif tox4 fix is blocked by test failure from master confirmed by sean-k-mooney[m] last year. | |
| 10:04:56 | gibi | I fixed up the placement tox4 patch based on stephenfin's comments now | |
| 10:05:00 | bauzas | k | |
| 10:05:17 | bauzas | working on some reproducer downstream atm | |
| 10:05:52 | gibi | ack | |
| 12:31:19 | opendevreview | Konrad Gube proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Use extend volume completion action https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/855490 | |
| 14:03:22 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: i have reviewed up to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854924/9 and am starting on it now. stephenfin is -1 on it i think just the docs/release notes can you adress those quickly? | |
| 14:03:36 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: looking... | |
| 14:04:21 | sean-k-mooney | i have approved everything before that so if you do fix it please avoid rebasing the previous patches :) | |
| 14:08:06 | gibi | sure :) | |
| 14:40:04 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Support cold migrate and resize with PCI tracking in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854247 | |
| 15:05:35 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: stephenfin ok so at this point stephen and i have completed the review fo the pci seriese. i have approve most of it including the followps so there are two bits left. 1 the docs/release note fixes noted above and the refactor in the last patch which is optional | |
| 15:05:57 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: thanks I will provide the fix for the followup toda | |
| 15:05:58 | sean-k-mooney | so i think we can wrap this up this week | |
| 15:07:30 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854929/8 my suggestion fro that is make it a mixin instead and only mix it into the filters that need it | |
| 15:07:47 | gibi | I will think about that | |
| 15:08:22 | sean-k-mooney | ack i dont think its pressing in any case. if we did not merge the last patch it would have no ill effect one way or anohter | |
| 15:08:46 | gibi | yepp, this was the reason we moved it to the top | |
| 15:08:47 | sean-k-mooney | im going to go afk for a few mins chat in a bit | |
| 15:08:49 | gibi | so it does not block us | |
| 15:08:52 | gibi | ack | |
| 16:31:04 | opendevreview | Pierre-Samuel Le Stang proposed openstack/nova master: Correctly reset instance task state in rebooting hard https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867832 | |
| 16:31:04 | opendevreview | Pierre-Samuel Le Stang proposed openstack/nova master: Reproducer test of bug #1999674 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867807 | |
| 16:41:31 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Follow up for the PCI in placement series https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/855654 | |
| 16:41:31 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Allow enabling PCI scheduling in Placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854924 | |
| 16:41:32 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce PCI pool filtering bug https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/855649 | |
| 16:41:32 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Rename _to_device_spec_conf to _to_list_of_json_str https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/855648 | |
| 16:41:33 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: FUP for the scheduler part of PCI in placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/862876 | |
| 16:41:33 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Strictly follow placement allocation during PCI claim https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/855650 | |
| 16:41:34 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Split ignored_tags in stats.py https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867978 | |
| 16:43:15 | gibi | stephenfin, sean-k-mooney[m]: fixed up the comments and added a new reno ^^ | |
| 17:39:20 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/osc-placement stable/zed: Make tox.ini tox 4.0.0 compatible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-placement/+/868722 | |
| 18:12:28 | dansmith | melwitt: sean-k-mooney: so I need to sanity check something with people for the stable compute node uuid stuff | |
| 18:12:53 | dansmith | ignoring the pep8 thing, I left one test failing on this patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/863917/1 | |
| 18:13:26 | dansmith | because the test checks for a thing that (a) was part of upgrade stuff from long ago and (b) is somewhat incompatible with the new stuff | |
| 18:14:19 | dansmith | this is the test: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/functional/regressions/test_bug_1764556.py#L69-L144 | |
| 18:14:53 | dansmith | it's checking going from a deleted service/node with no uuid to re-creating a service with the same name, which generates a node uuid | |
| 18:15:23 | dansmith | bug is here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1764556 | |
| 18:16:06 | dansmith | fixed in stein, so the test is checking for things that could have happened in an upgrade _to_ stein, where you deleted a service/node before the upgrade and then re-created it with the same name after the upgrade | |
| 18:16:46 | dansmith | what I want to do is just drop that test early in the stable compute uuid set as no longer relevant, but since that's a big red flag, I want to make sure people are okay with that | |
| 18:33:02 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Factor out a mixin class for candidate aware filters https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854929 | |
| 18:33:27 | gibi | stephenfin, sean-k-mooney[m]: another stab at the candidate aware schedule filter refactoring ^^ now with a mixing class | |
| 18:46:41 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: sorry was still in calls il read back in a bit | |
| 18:50:51 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: correct me if im wrong but before cells v2 when teh service were first added they just had an int id filed and later we added a uuid field later, not nessically for cellv2 but its required for cellsv2 for for service to be unique since we cant rely on the id filed being unique | |
| 18:51:09 | sean-k-mooney | i.g. the id filed was an auto_increment int primary key | |
| 18:51:25 | sean-k-mooney | and sicne the service are in the cell db we could have two with the same id in differnt cell dbs | |
| 18:51:47 | sean-k-mooney | and the uuid was added to give us a globally unique id for each service | |
| 18:51:58 | dansmith | that's one reason we added uuid on the compute node yeah. not sure if that's relevant here though. | |
| 18:52:19 | sean-k-mooney | well i mention that becuase test_instance_list_deleted_service_with_no_uuid | |
| 18:52:33 | sean-k-mooney | is there to test that upgrade case where the service has not had a uuid populated | |
| 18:52:48 | sean-k-mooney | that the old upgade behiovior you mentioned | |
| 18:52:51 | sean-k-mooney | i was just confirming that | |
| 18:54:51 | sean-k-mooney | the test is also testign what happens fi you delete and recreate teh service but thats not really the point its doing it to thest the online migration | |
| 18:55:41 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i think im fin with droping it given that only really works pre placement | |
| 18:56:00 | dansmith | the point of the test (AFAICT) is to test the case where you restart a compute after the upgrade, when you deleted it before the upgrade | |
| 18:56:18 | dansmith | good point on pre-placement, didn't even think about that | |
| 18:56:21 | sean-k-mooney | right which should not work | |
| 18:57:39 | sean-k-mooney | ``` 4. start a new service with the old hostname (still host1); this will | |
| 18:57:41 | sean-k-mooney | also create a new compute_nodes table record for that host/node | |
| 18:57:43 | sean-k-mooney | ``` | |
| 18:58:29 | sean-k-mooney | so if the host had allocations then one of two thing would happen etierh we delete all callocation when we deleted teh service | |
| 18:58:47 | sean-k-mooney | and when the new rp is created with the new cn uuid we need to rebuild them | |
| 18:59:23 | sean-k-mooney | or the service delete would fail if you were on older version of openstack because of thte allocations | |
| 18:59:48 | dansmith | well, it couldn't have had allocations, because it didn't have a uuid before | |
| 18:59:54 | sean-k-mooney | if the RP is not removed the compute agent will get a rp conflict due to duplicate RP name with different uuids | |
| 19:00:17 | sean-k-mooney | oh right | |
| 19:00:24 | dansmith | the scenario is for computes that were created (and deleted) before we had CN uuids | |
| 19:00:51 | sean-k-mooney | is this compute node uuids or service uuids | |
| 19:01:11 | sean-k-mooney | i tought this test was a compute service with no compute service uuid | |
| 19:01:19 | sean-k-mooney | not compute node uuid | |
| 19:03:25 | dansmith | the test is more focused on service, but the implication is what happens to the CN for us | |
| 19:03:41 | dansmith | because you don't delete computes, you delete services, which is what the bug is about | |
| 19:03:44 | dansmith | bug/test | |
| 19:03:57 | sean-k-mooney | right | |
| 19:04:14 | sean-k-mooney | so the problem is really the creation of the new compute node recorrd | |
| 19:04:16 | melwitt | I'm pretty sure it's compute node uuid that was added | |
| 19:04:46 | dansmith | well, they were both added at one point, | |
| 19:04:51 | dansmith | but yes compute node was most recent (although still a long time ago) | |
| 19:05:15 | melwitt | hm, yeah. this is confusing | |
| 19:05:28 | dansmith | the "problem" for me is that the test relies on us creating a new compute node for the resurrected service | |
| 19:05:39 | dansmith | which will get a new auto-generated node uuid | |