| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-05-07 | |||
| 16:02:35 | gibi | #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) | |
| 16:02:51 | gibi | #info No Critical bug | |
| 16:03:12 | gibi | is there any bug that needs discussion today? | |
| 16:03:26 | erlon | Must be critical I suppose? | |
| 16:04:33 | auniyal | gibi, not critical but seems imp to me https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2063342 | |
| 16:04:38 | tkajinam | this is not very critical now but there is one remaining follow-up about excludes cleanup. would be nice if it can get 2nd +2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-traits/+/917713 | |
| 16:04:40 | gibi | erlon: if you feel it worth discussing with the foks then sure | |
| 16:05:50 | erlon | So, I need some reviews on the RBAC support patch. Its the last one fron the series: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/811521?usp=search | |
| 16:06:40 | gibi | erlon: OK, noted. | |
| 16:06:50 | erlon | thanks | |
| 16:07:16 | gibi | auniyal: my immediate reaction that bug is to ask if they tried to archive deleted rows | |
| 16:07:20 | erlon | Should I add it to the etherepad or you do? | |
| 16:07:58 | gibi | erlon: I will | |
| 16:08:11 | erlon | Thanks | |
| 16:08:22 | gibi | auniyal: but reading it more it is about instance action | |
| 16:08:35 | gibi | growing without bound for non deleted instances | |
| 16:09:26 | sean-k-mooney | erlon's patch is for a blueprint that is not approved | |
| 16:09:27 | auniyal | yes, can we add some preodic updated nova can do to DB | |
| 16:09:28 | gibi | and I see they proposed a nova-manage command to trim the action list. We at least need a blueprint for it | |
| 16:09:49 | sean-k-mooney | so it need to be appoved here first before we can proceed with it | |
| 16:10:02 | sean-k-mooney | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/shared-security-groups | |
| 16:10:14 | erlon | what does that require? to aprove? | |
| 16:11:06 | sean-k-mooney | agreement that this does not requrie a spec and that we are ok to proceed with adding supprot for neutron SRBC for security groups to nova | |
| 16:11:52 | sean-k-mooney | basically this is a case of the new feature was added to neutron a few release ago and the nova side was not done | |
| 16:11:56 | erlon | ok, so I suppose that the blueprint was mostly a formality | |
| 16:12:26 | sean-k-mooney | well no the blueprint is alwasy requried for features like this but the quetion is does it also need a spec | |
| 16:13:14 | erlon | a spec seems a overkill | |
| 16:13:15 | gibi | erlon: does it need any nova API, db, RPC, or object model changes? Does it have upgrade impct? | |
| 16:13:33 | sean-k-mooney | in this particalr case there is not direct api impact. do we want to move this to the opendicussion stection by the way | |
| 16:13:36 | sean-k-mooney | or resolve this now | |
| 16:14:16 | gibi | lets resolve it | |
| 16:14:17 | sean-k-mooney | the reason i say there is no direct api impact is the api bechiaov changes but the requesst does not and i dont think we need a microversion | |
| 16:14:28 | gibi | OK. | |
| 16:14:42 | gibi | I see it depends on a new neutron extension | |
| 16:14:42 | sean-k-mooney | so without this feature you can only reference secuirty groups that are created in your project | |
| 16:14:55 | erlon | @gibi, no, just adds some calls to neutron client | |
| 16:15:04 | sean-k-mooney | with this feature you can use a secrutiy group defiend in another project but shread with your project | |
| 16:15:27 | sean-k-mooney | so before the change you would have got a error and after the vm would boot | |
| 16:15:46 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: that is a reasonable behavior change | |
| 16:16:02 | sean-k-mooney | yep its tradign a vm in error due to SecurityGroupNotFound: Security group 0c649378-1cf8-48e0-9eb4-b72772c35a62 not found. in swpan | |
| 16:16:05 | sean-k-mooney | for a booting vm | |
| 16:16:20 | sean-k-mooney | so i dont think that a breaking change and therfor no api impact | |
| 16:17:24 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: erlon has a patch for review https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/811521 and the code changes are confied to the neutorn module in nova | |
| 16:17:25 | gibi | There is a preformance impact discussed in the impl, does that sever enough to pull it out to a spec? | |
| 16:17:54 | sean-k-mooney | the performace impact is 1 addtion call to list security group that are shared with you | |
| 16:18:26 | gibi | as far as I see if you don't use shared SG then you don't have the extra overhead | |
| 16:18:36 | sean-k-mooney | based on the trace back in the bug it got to the comptue manger beforfe that happend | |
| 16:18:39 | sean-k-mooney | so i think that ok | |
| 16:18:54 | sean-k-mooney | am well no we dont know fi its shared or not | |
| 16:18:54 | gibi | OK. I'm not against approving this without a spec | |
| 16:19:14 | sean-k-mooney | but we only need to make the call if neutron has the extention | |
| 16:19:34 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I mean if the deployment doesn't use share SGs the the first query will find the grouo | |
| 16:19:53 | gibi | scratch it, I'm wrong | |
| 16:20:20 | sean-k-mooney | well if we reorded https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/811521/8/nova/network/neutron.py | |
| 16:20:25 | sean-k-mooney | we proably could avoid that ya | |
| 16:20:30 | gibi | anyhow I'm OK to approve this and continue discussing the impl | |
| 16:20:43 | gibi | do we feel we have chorum without bauzas ? | |
| 16:20:45 | sean-k-mooney | so im not against doing this as specless and ya defering to the gerrit review | |
| 16:20:56 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: what do you think? | |
| 16:21:01 | gibi | quorum even | |
| 16:21:25 | sean-k-mooney | i dont know if gmann is around either | |
| 16:21:42 | sean-k-mooney | im tentivly ok with saying yes but mabey we can double check next week | |
| 16:22:08 | sean-k-mooney | "yes" -> approve this as specless and move discuuion to gerrit review | |
| 16:22:10 | gibi | OK. lets discuss it next week with the others around | |
| 16:22:20 | dansmith | yeah, sorry, multitasking | |
| 16:23:22 | gibi | ack, lets get back to this next week then | |
| 16:23:23 | dansmith | looks like basic enablement of a neutron feature though, | |
| 16:23:41 | dansmith | so unless it breaks some nova-side model it seems like specless would be fine | |
| 16:23:46 | gibi | OK | |
| 16:23:57 | dansmith | but also think it's probably fine/good to wait for bauzas anyway | |
| 16:24:13 | gibi | then I will let bauzas know that is it OK to approve from our side | |
| 16:24:17 | dansmith | ++ | |
| 16:24:20 | gibi | thanks | |
| 16:24:58 | gibi | #action bauzas to approve //blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/shared-security-groups if he don't disagree | |
| 16:25:01 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Update and Re-propose "Allow Manila shares to be directly attached to an instance when using libvirt" for Dalmatian https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/913997 | |
| 16:25:52 | gibi | tkajinam: I will check https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-traits/+/917713 after the meeting | |
| 16:26:07 | gibi | any other bug to discuss? | |
| 16:27:12 | tkajinam | gibi, thx | |
| 16:27:26 | gibi | moving on | |
| 16:27:39 | gibi | #topic Gate status | |
| 16:27:49 | gibi | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs | |
| 16:28:03 | gibi | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-ci-failures-minimal | |
| 16:28:11 | gibi | #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fnova&project=openstack%2Fplacement&pipeline=periodic-weekly Nova&Placement periodic jobs status | |
| 16:28:32 | gibi | emulation job failed on zed and antelope | |
| 16:29:02 | gibi | ohh actually failed on every branch | |
| 16:29:27 | sean-k-mooney | fun anything obvious | |
| 16:29:54 | gibi | this is the master failure https://f267574198a517c003d1-a40b9478ae1bd073dc32f331038fe6d7.ssl.cf5.rackcdn.com/periodic-weekly/opendev.org/openstack/nova/master/nova-emulation/825cc9a/testr_results.html | |
| 16:30:30 | gibi | I did not dig deeper | |
| 16:30:45 | gibi | would be nice to see if the failures on each branch are the same or not | |
| 16:30:45 | auniyal | it only adds req-id | |
| 16:30:45 | auniyal | I added this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/918439 for same - is there a way we can run priodic depends on this ? | |
| 16:30:49 | sean-k-mooney | Instance failed to spawn: oslo_messaging.rpc.client.RemoteError: Remote error: DBConnectionError (pymysql.err.OperationalError) (2013, 'Lost connection to MySQL server during query') | |
| 16:30:59 | sean-k-mooney | so maybe an oom kill | |
| 16:31:05 | sean-k-mooney | of the db | |
| 16:31:24 | auniyal | I saw this for antelope https://zuul.openstack.org/build/183dfe690ad44431b023ef95ec347bd9 | |
| 16:31:28 | gibi | OK, I can check the logs tomorrow for possible oom | |
| 16:31:57 | dansmith | emulation being slower, oom kill seems likely I bet | |
| 16:32:02 | sean-k-mooney | we can move on lill quickly tak a look | |
| 16:32:18 | gibi | #action gibi to check the nova-emulation periodic failures for oom kill events | |
| 16:32:31 | gibi | any other gate issue we need to discuss today? | |