| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-09-13 | |||
| 14:10:23 | sean-k-mooney | we dont have a job that would catch this currently | |
| 14:10:32 | sean-k-mooney | we do not have any testing with nova on shared storage | |
| 14:11:34 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: so im saying i can create one and also put the numa stuff in it, or i can proceed with putting the numa stuff in teh ceph jobs and we can create a seperate nova-shared-stroage-migration job | |
| 14:12:22 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: do you have a prefernce? | |
| 14:12:37 | bauzas | kill shared storage with fire ? | |
| 14:12:44 | sean-k-mooney | :) | |
| 14:13:18 | bauzas | you can have a shared image backend, why would you mind using NFS which would create you don't know ? | |
| 14:13:41 | sean-k-mooney | well i cant argue agaisnt that but we coudl certenly make it less teribad in the future if we included this as part of the image backend refactor | |
| 14:13:53 | bauzas | another good case, yes | |
| 14:14:08 | sean-k-mooney | like if we had image_typs=nfs that would simplfy things a lot | |
| 14:15:21 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: lets pause this dicussion for now and we can loop back to the tempest coverage after rc1 | |
| 14:17:03 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: https://github.com/openstack/devstack-plugin-nfs currently just supprot seting up cinder on nfs so to test this i woudl eiter need to extend that or just put it in the nova devstack plugin which is honestly simpler | |
| 14:18:34 | sean-k-mooney | when we have a little more time ill try and figure out which job to extend to give us the most test coverage without needing extra josb | |
| 14:21:13 | sean-k-mooney | im thinkg of using nova-ovs-hybrid-plug to test shared storage and numa and then just leave the ceph job as is | |
| 14:25:33 | sean-k-mooney | summerised that here https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/913842/comments/ee7e862a_c1fd1b8c | |
| 14:26:25 | sean-k-mooney | frickler: is there a dnm that testing your openstack client patch | |
| 14:27:02 | sean-k-mooney | frickler: if not i need to rebase one of my patches to adress a nit anyway so i might add a depends on to it | |
| 14:56:47 | gibi | bauzas: which way you want to land the shared storage fix: a) I add the UT to supamatt's commit directly or b) I push the UT separately and then I can +2 the commit with the fix still | |
| 14:58:56 | bauzas | can we squash both ? | |
| 14:59:13 | bauzas | you can +2 the patch, I'm fine | |
| 14:59:25 | bauzas | I'll explain in my comment why it's fine | |
| 14:59:40 | bauzas | (and I want to stop by the top of the hour :) ) | |
| 15:01:28 | gibi | OK I will push the squash in 5 mins | |
| 15:08:12 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2024.2: Update .gitreview for stable/2024.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/929290 | |
| 15:08:13 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2024.2: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/2024.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/929291 | |
| 15:08:15 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement master: Update master for stable/2024.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/929292 | |
| 15:09:35 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Fix regression with live migration on shared storage https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/928970 | |
| 15:09:40 | gibi | bauzas: ^^ | |
| 15:09:45 | gibi | sorry it was 8 minutes | |
| 15:09:56 | gibi | but I can offer an extended commit message in return :) | |
| 15:12:19 | gibi | cc artom: ^^ | |
| 15:16:49 | gibi | and I need to drop now | |
| 15:16:59 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: allow upgrade of pre-victoria InstanceNUMACells https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929187 | |
| 15:22:13 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: can you please review https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/928970 ? | |
| 15:22:52 | frickler | sean-k-mooney: no, I only tested locally, feel free to add a dep to verify | |
| 15:24:27 | sean-k-mooney | frickler:i have +2 the client patch after verifyign the filed in the sdk and novaclient | |
| 15:24:45 | sean-k-mooney | frickler: i have also added it as a depedn on in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929187 | |
| 15:24:55 | sean-k-mooney | altough i dont knwo fi the jobs are set up to pull in osc form souce | |
| 15:25:10 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: sure ill take a look now | |
| 15:25:27 | bauzas | thanks, now I need to go off | |
| 15:25:33 | sean-k-mooney | frickler: i think at this point we just need someone form the sdk team to +w the clinet patch | |
| 15:26:13 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: o/ enjoy your weekend | |
| 15:26:29 | bauzas | thanks | |
| 15:30:40 | sean-k-mooney | +2w, the approch looks good. i woudl have prefer a functioanl regression test but the coverage is enough to proceed with. ill look at tempest ci coverage for this next week if i have time | |
| 20:02:01 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Add Dalmatian prelude section https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/928995 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2024-09-14 | |||
| 20:31:42 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] provide a nix flake for simple dev envs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929354 | |
| 20:31:42 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [tox] add LOCALE_ARCHIVE to passenv https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929353 | |
| 20:34:26 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] provide a nix flake for simple dev envs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929354 | |
| 20:34:26 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [tox] add LOCALE_ARCHIVE to passenv https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929353 | |
| 22:37:12 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] provide a nix flake for simple dev envs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929354 | |
| 22:38:30 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] provide a nix flake for simple dev envs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929354 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2024-09-15 | |||
| 12:27:13 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] provide a nix flake for simple dev envs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929354 | |
| 12:27:14 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [tox] enable piwheels to speed up tox https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929366 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2024-09-16 | |||
| 06:18:54 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: Drop SQLALCHEMY_WARN_20 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929395 | |
| 06:22:56 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/placement master: Drop SQLALCHEMY_WARN_20 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/929397 | |
| 06:25:18 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: Drop SQLALCHEMY_WARN_20 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929395 | |
| 06:25:41 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/placement master: Drop SQLALCHEMY_WARN_20 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/929397 | |
| 06:40:02 | auniyal | Zuul UI updated https://zuul.openstack.org/status, looks pretty good, ++ to who ever is responsible | |
| 07:31:56 | gibi | yeah nice UI rewamp | |
| 10:04:13 | gibi | bauzas: do you aware that we have a blocked gate still even though the openstackclient evacuate fix is merged in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/929236 ? | |
| 10:04:23 | gibi | do we need a new client release and a upper constraint bump? | |
| 10:06:03 | gibi | elodilles: maybe you have more context on this ^^ | |
| 11:53:43 | bauzas | gibi: yup, I was aware of the problem, hence my question in the #openstack-release channel | |
| 11:54:18 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: if your talking about th osc issue | |
| 11:54:32 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin just porposed a 7.1.1 release to adress it | |
| 11:54:41 | bauzas | gibi: we need https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/929402 to be merged and then creating a new release | |
| 11:54:54 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: okay | |
| 11:55:22 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/929454 | |
| 11:56:14 | gibi | hm 7.1.1 is released from master but we have a backport https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/929402 merged to 2024.2 | |
| 11:56:22 | gibi | so I'm a bit confused which one to consume | |
| 11:56:51 | gibi | hm sorry 7.1.1 seems to point to the stable branch | |
| 11:57:05 | sean-k-mooney | we willl need to pull in 7.1.1 into 2024.2's uc | |
| 11:57:10 | sean-k-mooney | after the release | |
| 11:57:17 | gibi | yeah that is the next step after the release then | |
| 11:57:33 | sean-k-mooney | i just told stephen about the job failure and he is fixign the typo | |
| 11:57:57 | sean-k-mooney | ah already done | |
| 11:59:04 | sean-k-mooney | i could make depends on work but i think its will take about the same amount of time to get resulst that way as waitign for the release | |
| 12:03:51 | gibi | yepp | |
| 12:05:01 | sean-k-mooney | the reset of the stuff in this chain is more of an experiment but i would appricate if we could merge https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/929353 | |
| 12:06:24 | sean-k-mooney | it took a while to figure out why activatign the docs ven and running sphinx-build worked but tox -e docs didnt but it was trivial in the end | |
| 12:24:57 | amorin | hey nova team, is there any way to retrieve the nova instance az hints that were given during boot time other than looking in request_specs in DB? I can't find a way to retrieve that from the openstack/nova client/api | |
| 12:36:03 | bauzas | amorin: you need to upgrade to Caracal :) | |
| 12:36:07 | bauzas | amorin: https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/api-microversion-history.html#maximum-in-2024-1-caracal-and-2024-2-dalmatian | |
| 12:36:32 | bauzas | by microversion 2.95, it will tell you whether the instance was pinned or not to an AZ | |
| 12:36:45 | bauzas | s/2.95/2.96 sorry | |
| 13:03:34 | amorin | bauzas, perfect! Will take a look | |
| 13:04:11 | amorin | do you have, by chance, link to the commits related to that? Maybe I can hack my antelope :) | |
| 13:09:58 | amorin | no worrie, found it :) | |
| 15:26:59 | bauzas | elodilles: frickler: so, about the OSC upgrade, I heard some good concerns | |
| 15:28:43 | bauzas | we haven't really tested the new OSC version and we're afraid to see *other* regressions | |
| 15:29:49 | bauzas | wouldn't it be *less* risky to let nova 2024.2 pin at OSC 6.x like we had before ? | |
| 15:30:13 | bauzas | (discussing it here and not in #openstack-release as I'd prefer nova folks to also discuss it) | |
| 15:34:33 | elodilles | are you aware of any (potential) regression? :-o | |
| 15:47:04 | frickler | bauzas: well the thing is that you cannot pin osc just for nova. if you pin it for everyone, you miss out a lot of the new that has been added. so less risky, yes, but less progress, too. but essentially that's a discussion to take up with the sdk team mostly I'd think | |
| 15:47:40 | bauzas | well, I already got scars about late bumps | |
| 15:48:15 | bauzas | and I have very little confidence of those kind of issues not to reproduce later | |
| 15:48:41 | bauzas | clearly the uc jobs are not proven robust enought | |
| 15:48:43 | bauzas | enough | |
| 15:48:50 | melwitt | was there not a requirements freeze weeks ago? https://releases.openstack.org/dalmatian/schedule.html#d-rf | |
| 15:51:32 | frickler | reqs freeze is for external deps, it explicitly does not include openstack deliverables | |