Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-06-20
16:34:30 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add helper methods to rescue/unrescue shares https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860286
16:34:32 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Allow to mount manila share using Cephfs protocol https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/883862
16:34:32 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support rescuing an instance with shares (compute manager part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860288
16:34:34 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Check shares support (only API exception) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885752
16:34:34 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Check shares support (compute manager) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885751
16:34:36 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Check shares support (API) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850499
16:34:36 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Attach Manila shares via virtiofs (API) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/836830
16:34:38 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_attach notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850501
16:34:38 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add helper methods to attach/detach shares https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885753
16:34:40 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add shares to InstancePayload https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851029
16:34:40 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_detach notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851028
16:34:42 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_detach_error notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860283
16:34:42 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_attach_error notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860282
16:34:44 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add virt/libvirt error test cases https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852087
16:34:44 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add libvirt test to ensure metadata are working. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852086
16:34:46 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Allow config to support virtiofs (driver) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/886522
16:34:46 opendevreview ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Docs about Manila shares API usage https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/871642
16:35:25 gibi it was almost like the PTG :)
16:36:15 sean-k-mooney ouch
16:36:30 sean-k-mooney i can feel the heat form that burn form here
16:43:28 gibi :)
16:54:51 dansmith heh
19:34:30 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/877056
20:04:56 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: database: Archive parent and child rows "trees" one at a time https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/877056
#openstack-nova - 2023-06-21
10:11:46 opendevreview Jakub Skunda proposed openstack/nova master: Drop Fedora support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/886596
11:37:11 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Adds cleanup to remove dangling volumes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/878757
11:47:50 noonedeadpunk hey folks, I've found this wiki page lately, and it looks like this should be supported by nova, as the `migrate_set_capability` is a command that's passed to the qemu monitor https://wiki.qemu.org/Features/Migration-Multiple-fds
11:48:16 noonedeadpunk So I was wondering, if that's smth that should be supported by nova, or I can set it in some other way as well?
12:02:39 noonedeadpunk And also according to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1968540 it seems there's another way around in progress now. But maybe it's worth mentioning in docs as a note about performance hit by using TLS for migrations?
13:43:58 bauzas noonedeadpunk: sorry was barely paying attention to the chan
13:46:09 bauzas noonedeadpunk: so, basically you have concerns about migration performance ?
13:48:03 noonedeadpunk well, yes, as they can hardly finish with 1.2gbitp/s
13:48:36 noonedeadpunk It's slightly different on different hardware, but basically it's always single thread now that's handling migration/encryption
13:50:01 noonedeadpunk I've tried to check if gnutls 3.7.3 (default for ubuntu 22.04) helps (as it has this merged) https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/commit/6462916d2f6810409d5da1e13c4a0720f412c166
13:50:23 noonedeadpunk But seems that it's not enough to have that only in gnutls, apparently qemu should have smth as well
13:51:06 noonedeadpunk But was also wondering if anybody heard anything about x-multiple-fds in qemu capabilities
13:54:52 bauzas I'm not really a SME of this matter
13:54:59 bauzas maybe kashyap may help
13:56:14 bauzas kashyap: thanks, tl;dr noonedeadpunk has some concerns by the migration TLS performance due to a QEMU single threading
13:56:21 kashyap noonedeadpunk: Before I say anything further, please note that the "x-" prefix in QMP commands (like "x-multiple-fds") means it's experimental
13:56:34 kashyap That _said_: the multiple-fd work did come out of experimental, IIRC. Lemme check
13:56:52 kashyap bauzas: I see; I missed the earlier context; so would be good to know what kind of performance concerns are these
13:57:41 noonedeadpunk so using TLS for libvirt gives migration speed like 1.2gbitps - 3 gbitps depending on CPU, TCP live migrations are 20gbitps
13:57:54 noonedeadpunk (basically full link)
14:01:54 kashyap noonedeadpunk: Hmm, I mean I'd definitely expect some loss w/ built-in TLS -- as it involves the additional encryption over head -- but I don't have numbers off-hand as to what's "expected"
14:02:17 kashyap noonedeadpunk: Can you come to #virt (on OFTC) and ask there too? More libvirt migration experts hang out there
14:02:21 noonedeadpunk so diffference is quite dramatical
14:02:40 noonedeadpunk yes, sure
14:02:50 kashyap Yeah; it's almost 10 fold diff
14:03:02 bauzas noonedeadpunk: ohoh, good to know
14:07:50 noonedeadpunk enabling auto-convergance kinda solves issue, at least migrations do not fail
14:08:33 noonedeadpunk but being able to utilize more then 1 cpu would be better ofc...
14:08:36 kashyap Ah, that's good to know that auto-convergence did its job at least
14:08:55 kashyap I agree on utilization; let's check w/ the libvirt-QEMU guys
14:09:08 bauzas gtk
14:14:35 noonedeadpunk But I guess if that's performance diff is kinda confirmed, it might be worth mentioning in nova docs at very least
14:16:38 kashyap noonedeadpunk: I think you're using an older QEMU by judging the "x-" prefix; so first would be good to upgrade to a newer one that removes the "x-" prefix (experimental)
14:17:10 noonedeadpunk I've taken that from qemu wiki page :)
14:17:34 noonedeadpunk I guess I was testing on qemu 8.0.0 or smth
14:17:35 kashyap Yeah, the wiki-page tends to not get updated. I'm pretty sure it's now out of experimental; otherwise libvirt won't enable it (as you saw on #virt)
14:17:42 kashyap Also, see this response from danpb: https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2020-January/msg00527.html
14:17:43 noonedeadpunk yup
14:17:50 kashyap (Scroll down a bit)
14:22:20 noonedeadpunk Yeah, fair
14:45:20 noonedeadpunk Soooo.... Should we say that it make sense to add `parallel` option support to nova?
14:54:18 noonedeadpunk I would try to check what needs to be done for that... Should be pretty much trivial to add
14:57:28 bauzas noonedeadpunk: sorry again, but what do you mean ? is it due to a new QEMU release ?
14:58:53 noonedeadpunk bauzas: there's a parallel flag that's for sure already present in 8.0.0: https://libvirt.org/manpages/virsh.html#migrate
14:59:26 noonedeadpunk let me check if it's available even before that
15:01:01 noonedeadpunk It's also available in 6.0.0, and nova min libvirt version is already beyond that
15:02:38 noonedeadpunk but we also should be careful with amount of parallel connections not to affect running workloads
15:04:06 bauzas noonedeadpunk: sounds to me a feature request
15:04:39 bauzas but yeah, turning on this know could be possible
15:23:31 kashyap Yeah, it's a separate request to enable the parallel connections
16:32:22 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Remove mentions of removed scheduler filters https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/858050
17:33:02 melwitt stephenfin, sean-k-mooney: just fyi I updated https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/877056 to add the bug and release note and return early+unindent code block. and I've also rechecked the tempest test skip for the unrelated CI failures https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/886496
21:59:11 opendevreview Jakub Skunda proposed openstack/nova master: Drop Fedora support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/886596
#openstack-nova - 2023-06-22
04:12:14 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/os-vif stable/zed: set default qos policy https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/883016
05:45:49 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/os-vif stable/yoga: Delete trunk bridges to avoid race with Neutron https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/886709
05:45:50 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/os-vif stable/yoga: set default qos policy https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/886710
06:15:07 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/os-vif stable/xena: Delete trunk bridges to avoid race with Neutron https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/886715
06:15:08 opendevreview Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/os-vif stable/xena: set default qos policy https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/886716
10:30:52 opendevreview Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova master: Add a new NumInstancesWeigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/886232
11:03:50 dvo-plv Hello, Nova folks
11:04:02 dvo-plv Maybe you will have a cnahce to check this nova patch
11:04:03 dvo-plv https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/876075
11:04:15 dvo-plv This is a part of the virtio packed ring blueprint
11:22:12 manuvakery1 Hi .. Is it possible to create an instance on a disabled host by the admin using the ---host option?
11:39:04 manuvakery1 IIRC .. this was working in queens ..but in train throwing "No valid host was found"
11:54:12 opendevreview Elod Illes proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: Remove mentions of removed scheduler filters https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/858051
12:36:29 bauzas manuvakery1: by providing the host value, you ask the scheduler to verify it
12:36:47 bauzas manuvakery1: if the host is disabled, then the Compute filter will say no
13:20:27 noonedeadpunk bauzas: returning back to the discussion in Vancouver regarding cross-AZ scheduling - I see that topic was mentioned in the etherpad, but I can't recall why that's smth we should not do?
13:21:11 bauzas noonedeadpunk: hmmm, about what exactly ?
13:21:31 noonedeadpunk like having anti-AZ server groups
13:22:02 noonedeadpunk Right now we're trying to implement a cross-AZ scheduling of octavia amphoras by defining AZs in their config. And then mess up with OCtavia flows to ensure it will supply AZ to the scheduler
13:22:54 noonedeadpunk But now I've started thinking if that's correct path at all, and if would be easier to just enable anti-az option (alike to anti-affinity) and nova will handle that
13:23:19 bauzas noonedeadpunk: fortunately, you mean you would use soft-anti-affinity group policy ?
13:24:32 noonedeadpunk well, soft anti-affinity does ensure that VMs will spawn on different computes, but it doesn't care about different AZs, right?
13:25:24 noonedeadpunk So what I was thinking is smth like that, but specifically for cross-AZs spawning of VMs

Earlier   Later