| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-01-10 | |||
| 16:48:30 | sean-k-mooney | and elodilles is asking shoudl we keep the old beahivor in the backports | |
| 16:48:36 | bauzas | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864773/3/nova/conf/workarounds.py default on master is False | |
| 16:48:40 | bauzas | so that's opt-in | |
| 16:49:00 | bauzas | which is the same for the backports | |
| 16:49:02 | elodilles | i mean, given an installed environment, they upgrade, and the behaviour is changed with the upgraded nova | |
| 16:49:14 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: correct | |
| 16:49:18 | bauzas | elodilles: I don't see a problem here with keeping it opt-in | |
| 16:49:41 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: well it will required all operator to update there config to adress the bug | |
| 16:49:57 | elodilles | bauzas: it is opt-out :) you have to change the configuration to have the existing behaviour | |
| 16:50:10 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney which is the current behaviour on master, right? | |
| 16:50:32 | sean-k-mooney | on master we now set the reseved value on instnace boot | |
| 16:50:51 | sean-k-mooney | before this patch we set reserved wehn deleteing | |
| 16:51:12 | bauzas | because the option defaults to False, right? | |
| 16:51:28 | bauzas | if you set to True, you keep the original behaviou | |
| 16:51:29 | sean-k-mooney | the workaroudn option is a skip to opt out yes and it default to false | |
| 16:51:31 | bauzas | behaviour | |
| 16:51:35 | sean-k-mooney | correct | |
| 16:51:43 | bauzas | ok | |
| 16:51:48 | bauzas | so, say we backport this | |
| 16:51:54 | bauzas | as it is | |
| 16:52:22 | bauzas | to understand, that means we'll change the behaviour by upgrading to the latest (obviously .y) release | |
| 16:52:26 | sean-k-mooney | as is then the stable branchs get the new behaivor and you need to modify the config to restore the old behaiovr | |
| 16:52:44 | sean-k-mooney | but this is an internal implemation detail that is not part of any public contract | |
| 16:52:47 | bauzas | I think we have semver for communicating the behavioural change | |
| 16:52:49 | sean-k-mooney | so we felt this was better | |
| 16:53:29 | bauzas | can we discuss this out of the meeting ? | |
| 16:53:33 | bauzas | we have 5 mins left | |
| 16:53:35 | sean-k-mooney | sure | |
| 16:53:42 | bauzas | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:53:46 | bauzas | (bauzas) As a reminder, Summit proposals deadline is today 11:59pm PT | |
| 16:53:57 | elodilles | so if we release now zed, then the operators who uses zed, need to update their configs to have NOT to change how nova works | |
| 16:53:59 | bauzas | you have the very last minute to add your topics | |
| 16:54:26 | bauzas | fwiw, I proposed two forum sessions about nova onboarding and operator meet&greet | |
| 16:54:41 | bauzas | if someone wants to co-host the onboarding forum session, let me know | |
| 16:55:19 | bauzas | gmann: correct me but forum proposal deadline is on april ? | |
| 16:55:37 | bauzas | I'm confused by the fact they added the forum proposals in the tool | |
| 16:55:42 | gmann | bauzas: I hope so. I asked Erin in email but no reply yet. But from form it shows april | |
| 16:55:54 | bauzas | yup, hence my confusion | |
| 16:56:31 | kashyap | Oh, come on...after all the jobs passed, one "tempest-integrated-compute" job times out :( https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/8b07fa0b71c94fb6abb2b350c5c84c74 | |
| 16:56:31 | bauzas | I just hope we won't get like Berlin some Forum sessions that very look like Summit sessions with slides and one-sided discussions | |
| 16:56:44 | bauzas | kashyap: on our meeting atm | |
| 16:56:45 | kashyap | Oops, sorry for that random chime in. | |
| 16:56:52 | kashyap | bauzas: Yeah, only realized it just now (sorry) | |
| 16:56:56 | bauzas | np | |
| 16:57:00 | bauzas | (gmann) updates on switching the RBAC(scope and new defaults) defaults in nova | |
| 16:57:08 | gibi | bauzas: if you need a co-host for the onboarding then you can write me up | |
| 16:57:09 | bauzas | you have 3 mins | |
| 16:57:36 | bauzas | gibi: noted. I'm used to do some onboarding and I have ideas but having a co-speaker is somehow better | |
| 16:57:44 | gibi | sure | |
| 16:58:07 | bauzas | looks like gmann is gone and our meeting will end | |
| 16:58:14 | gmann | patch is ready for review #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866218/12 | |
| 16:58:19 | bauzas | cool thanks | |
| 16:58:40 | bauzas | gmann: I've seen your ping, I just didn't had time to review it yet | |
| 16:58:44 | gmann | please check and it need placement test fixture change too which is depends-on on nova change #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/869525/3 | |
| 16:59:05 | gmann | do not want to delay the switching at the end of cycle | |
| 16:59:32 | bauzas | I've just said review-prio +2 | |
| 16:59:44 | gmann | Tempest already run integration job with new RBAC on Nova, glance, neutron and cinder and it is passing finw | |
| 16:59:48 | gmann | thanks | |
| 16:59:51 | bauzas | \o/ | |
| 17:00:03 | opendevreview | Pavlo Shchelokovskyy proposed openstack/nova master: Process all nodes when host aggregate changes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869687 | |
| 17:00:15 | bauzas | ok, we're on time | |
| 17:00:16 | bauzas | thanks all | |
| 17:00:20 | opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-10-16.00.log.html | |
| 17:00:20 | opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-10-16.00.txt | |
| 17:00:20 | opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-10-16.00.html | |
| 17:00:20 | opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Jan 10 17:00:20 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 17:00:20 | bauzas | #endmeeting | |
| 17:00:22 | gibi | o/ thanks' | |
| 17:00:43 | elodilles | thanks o/ | |
| 17:00:58 | gmann | thanks o/ | |
| 17:01:18 | clarkb | re nox it is definitely worth careful consideration and discussion. I like to bring it up ecause I've found many people aren't aware there is an alternative. As far as why I think it is worth considering the main thing is that it is simpler and uses simple building blocks instead of a bunch of custom rewrites of standard tools like build | |
| 17:01:30 | clarkb | when you install things you just run pip basically. | |
| 17:01:45 | clarkb | and you aren't getting custom wheel building like with tox for example | |
| 17:02:44 | gmann | bauzas: dansmith: this is tempest job enabling new rbac and passing fine. I am adding same in nova side too in 866218 https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-enforce-scope-new-defaults&skip=0 | |
| 17:04:13 | sean-k-mooney | johnthetubaguy: can you review this ironic hostaggreate change https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869687 | |
| 17:04:31 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: ^ also good for you to look at | |
| 17:04:57 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: did we settel on ironic is not supprot for host aggreates a while ago when chatting downstream | |
| 17:06:35 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I thought we said given we only support hostnames in aggregates (and not nodenames), I hardly understand how this can work | |
| 17:07:15 | bauzas | but you can target a specific nova-compute using aggregates so that can still work with sharded ironic nodes | |
| 17:07:41 | sean-k-mooney | when you add a comptue host to thet api https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=add-host-detail#add-host | |
| 17:07:46 | sean-k-mooney | you are adding the comptue service | |
| 17:07:59 | sean-k-mooney | and ironic is currently loadbalanceing compute nodes between compute services | |
| 17:09:37 | bauzas | agreed, that's what I said | |
| 17:09:51 | bauzas | but you can't target a node, that's my point | |
| 17:10:19 | bauzas | the good news is that placement aggregates support nodes | |
| 17:10:45 | sean-k-mooney | right so what they are trying to do in that patch is incluse all the ironic RPs created for the ironic servier in the the placement aggreate | |
| 17:10:50 | bauzas | so theorically, you could do some flavorey query about it | |
| 17:11:16 | sean-k-mooney | you coudl but if we proceed with this patch we are baissly saying we now supprot host aggrates with ironic again | |
| 17:11:29 | sean-k-mooney | im pretty sure we did in the past and that broke at some point | |
| 17:11:59 | sean-k-mooney | where somepoint is a long long time ago | |
| 17:12:47 | bauzas | long long time ago, we were not having placement aggregates | |
| 17:13:09 | bauzas | and if I blame the existing add_host_to_agg code, I don't think I'll see a difference | |
| 17:14:02 | sean-k-mooney | didnt we used to have multipel compute services for ironic ndoes or something | |
| 17:15:40 | bauzas | I don't think so but I could be wrong | |
| 17:16:43 | sean-k-mooney | ok your right we did not | |
| 17:16:45 | sean-k-mooney | https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/juno/implemented/add-ironic-driver.html#proposed-change | |
| 17:16:53 | sean-k-mooney | it was intially one compute service | |
| 17:17:20 | sean-k-mooney | then we supported muple in newton https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/implemented/ironic-multiple-compute-hosts.html | |
| 17:20:56 | sean-k-mooney | i guess based on https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/implemented/cells-aggregate-api-db.html | |
| 17:21:11 | sean-k-mooney | the aggreate api si ment ot be aggreate to compute node mappings | |