| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-11-21 | |||
| 12:58:32 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Manila shares admin guide documentation https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/871642 | |
| 13:11:28 | sean-k-mooney | jkulik: you can do that without modifying existing flavor using isolating aggreates in placment to declare the new trait as required | |
| 13:11:46 | sean-k-mooney | jkulik: https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/isolate-aggregates.html | |
| 13:12:15 | sean-k-mooney | we have talked about adding a simiar command to the image property update a few times but no one has had the time to move it forward | |
| 13:14:01 | jkulik | cool, I didn't know about that filter. I'm not sure if we did more changes in addition to traits, though. Very helpful, though. | |
| 14:23:44 | mnasiadka | https://opendev.org/openstack/monasca-api/src/commit/c36c2c69a4227e0c1da04f3044bfa4b059a55781/monasca_api/config.py#L83 - due to https://github.com/benoitc/gunicorn/issues/2286. Anybody has any ideas? | |
| 14:23:44 | mnasiadka | Hello there, was doing a small experiment to switch from apache/mod_wsgi to gunicorn in Kolla (since uwsgi is in maintenance mode, so I'd prefer to do it once than switch again when the wind blows in other direction), but it seems gunicorn does not support pyargv - so I guess the only option is to do what Monasca did - | |
| 15:22:03 | ildikov | sean-k-mooney: Hi Sean, I'm sorry for being on and off yesterday. I looked into the Nova contributor docs links you shared. The documentation seems to be very extensive, which is great. At the same time, it seems like there are a few areas that need some updates to reflect what processes the team is currently using, since y'all are continuously evolving those. Is my understanding accurate? | |
| 15:26:31 | ildikov | sean-k-mooney: I also understand your frustration about the feedback towards Nova regarding docs. In my case, my feedback was influenced by the conversation I had with bauzas at the OpenInfra Summit about the new etherpad process not being in the Nova docs yet. I intended to focus on fixing that, rather than implying that Nova doesn't have documentation in these areas at all. | |
| 15:26:34 | ildikov | sean-k-mooney: I'm sorry I wasn't able to phrase my point more clearly. | |
| 15:28:03 | ildikov | One thing I got curious about while looking at the docs, is how much people discover and use them. I think there should be some stats available somewhere at least on the level of page views. | |
| 15:30:12 | ildikov | Do you think that would be useful information to have? What other metrics do you think would be worth while to look into to figure out how to improve the content and visibility of the docs? | |
| 15:33:19 | sean-k-mooney | ya so usign the etherpad was new last cycle and bauzas didnt get aroudn to updatign the process doc with that | |
| 15:33:54 | ildikov | ah, ok, I understand | |
| 15:34:08 | ildikov | I didn't have that piece of information | |
| 15:34:40 | sean-k-mooney | the 2 cycles before we use the gerrit review priority lable | |
| 15:35:15 | ildikov | has the etherpad process fully replaced the Gerrit review label one? | |
| 15:36:08 | sean-k-mooney | yes i actully had an action item to update the gerrrit config to remvoe it | |
| 15:36:18 | sean-k-mooney | well i offeren to do that | |
| 15:36:32 | sean-k-mooney | but we never decied to actuly go do it but at this point i think we can just for clarity | |
| 15:38:21 | ildikov | I understand, these processes need implementation steps and people to get used to them, so it can get harder to decide to remove them | |
| 15:38:55 | sean-k-mooney | yep so i can just go find the patch i used to add the labels and propose a revert | |
| 15:39:16 | sean-k-mooney | cores stopped using it and moved to the etherpad | |
| 15:39:18 | ildikov | +1 | |
| 15:40:03 | ildikov | do you think it makes sense to leave the description in the docs as an archive to remind people what the team tried in the past? | |
| 15:40:21 | ildikov | or should it be replaced with the description of how the new ether pad-based process works? | |
| 15:40:43 | sean-k-mooney | perhapse if we do that it shoudl have a note saying its not used or strick through | |
| 15:40:48 | sean-k-mooney | but its alwasy in git | |
| 15:40:55 | sean-k-mooney | so im inclined to delete it | |
| 15:41:08 | sean-k-mooney | we shoudl remove the section related to runways as well | |
| 15:41:27 | ildikov | yeah, the target audience for those docs are newcomers and casual contributors for the most part | |
| 15:42:06 | ildikov | so having only the information there that's currently relevant for them is probably the best approach | |
| 15:42:57 | sean-k-mooney | ildikov: the history is we used to track priority the nova wiki, then that moved to the spec repo about 10 years ago, then we decied that was too heavy weight and we moved to "runways" in etherpad 6-8 years ago, then that hadd too much load on the ptl to we went to review priority lable about 3 years ago and back to a lighter weigher etherpad last year | |
| 15:43:39 | sean-k-mooney | over all that time specs/bluepirnts/bug usage has not changed. just where we keep the list of items ready to review and the prioriteis to review | |
| 15:44:16 | ildikov | I understand, it seems the team went through quite a few rounds of simplifications | |
| 15:44:54 | sean-k-mooney | as the team size got smaller and smaller and contonutions dropped off the cost of the more complex approches just didnt make sense | |
| 15:45:06 | sean-k-mooney | *contibutions | |
| 15:45:18 | ildikov | understandable | |
| 15:46:01 | ildikov | even with a bigger team size, I'm always a fan of simpler processes, when possible | |
| 15:46:01 | sean-k-mooney | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-2025.1-status so we call it the status etherpad | |
| 15:46:36 | sean-k-mooney | basically because it a light weight way to highlight the progress or lack there of of somethign that peropsl are activly working on | |
| 15:46:48 | sean-k-mooney | but its in etherpad so that anyone can edit it | |
| 15:47:24 | ildikov | oh nice! | |
| 15:47:53 | ildikov | it looks like a good overview of what the team is tracking throughout the release cycle | |
| 15:48:20 | ildikov | gives the opportunity to do a bit of project management, but without being too heavy on the tooling | |
| 15:48:54 | sean-k-mooney | yep this is the dalmaition one https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-dalmatian-status and caracal https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-caracal-status | |
| 15:49:14 | sean-k-mooney | its useful wehn lookign for cycle highlights or releasenotes too | |
| 15:49:38 | sean-k-mooney | that why we have the complete bugs and features section | |
| 15:50:01 | sean-k-mooney | you dont need ot have your review listed on the eptherpad for it to get reviewed or merged | |
| 15:50:24 | sean-k-mooney | it just help publicise it so its simpler for reviewers to find | |
| 15:52:02 | ildikov | I love that! | |
| 15:52:51 | ildikov | sometimes it's hard to fish for cycle highlights, etc, so it's nice y'all have the pointers in the etherpad | |
| 15:53:30 | ildikov | I have a meeting coming up, so will step away from IRC a bit | |
| 15:53:46 | ildikov | I don't know enough about the processes to update the contributor docs myself | |
| 15:54:20 | ildikov | what other ways can I help to make improvements and help new and casual contributors looking into Nova? | |
| 15:57:53 | sean-k-mooney | ildikov: its litrally just a normal review. so if you think you can rupdate it to help in anyway and have time to submit a reivew to the docs then please do, you could track it as a docs bug if you wanted too. | |
| 15:58:47 | sean-k-mooney | creating a bug for this and addign it to the meeting adgenda (the open discussion section) woudl proably be a good way forward | |
| 15:59:11 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure that ill have time to go do the doc update but perhaps that is somethign bauzas can help drive as ptl | |
| 16:00:14 | ildikov | sean-k-mooney: Sounds good. I'll create a docs bug later today, that is easy to do. We can then figure out next steps from there. | |
| 16:00:34 | ildikov | sean-k-mooney: thank you for the nice chat and the guidance! | |
| 16:00:49 | sean-k-mooney | no worries, enjoy your meeting :P | |
| 16:01:28 | sean-k-mooney | ill revert https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/787523 in the interim | |
| 16:02:05 | sean-k-mooney | a striat revert wont work becasue we updated them in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/837595 but it wont take long to create a patch to do this | |
| 16:29:09 | bauzas | ildikov: sean-k-mooney : sorry I was awfully busy those days (and I don't wanna speak about last weeks-months) | |
| 16:29:37 | bauzas | that's still a TODO on myself to rejuvanate the docs but I'll try to make it soon as I can | |
| 16:52:39 | ildikov | bauzas: no worries | |
| 16:52:50 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: ok so with an invalid config for the resource list, the error is raised during startup but it is not causing the nova-api process to exit https://paste.openstack.org/show/b7s0zWslkXznihw1Y3yB/ | |
| 16:53:16 | ildikov | bauzas: is it helpful to you if I create the docs bug that we talked about with Sean earlier? | |
| 16:57:37 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: the oslo.service based processes do exit with a bad config (like nova-conductor). so the wsgi app case needs a bit more to cause an exit of the process | |
| 17:13:28 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: nova-manage: Add flavor scanning to migrate_to_unified_limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924110 | |
| 17:15:33 | sean-k-mooney | is the wsgi app that is reloading | |
| 17:22:26 | melwitt | you're saying the wsgi app is reloading? | |
| 17:24:51 | sean-k-mooney | i was asking if it was | |
| 17:25:08 | sean-k-mooney | so is it not exeitign becuase its failign but reloading on a new request ectra | |
| 17:25:42 | sean-k-mooney | for example if you run it under nova-api console script it proably will exit like the other console scripts | |
| 17:26:52 | melwitt | I wonder if this is a matter of wsgi app config like "exit-on-reload = false" | |
| 17:27:09 | melwitt | yes I believe so | |
| 17:28:04 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: so to me that past loks like the app exited | |
| 17:28:10 | sean-k-mooney | bhttps://paste.openstack.org/show/b7s0zWslkXznihw1Y3yB/ | |
| 17:28:30 | sean-k-mooney | but i woudl guess apache/uwsgi will try and reload it on the next request | |
| 17:28:32 | melwitt | yeah ... so why the process stays? I don't know much about this stuff | |
| 17:28:42 | melwitt | oh | |
| 17:28:45 | sean-k-mooney | which process is staying | |
| 17:28:56 | sean-k-mooney | we have 2 apache and then uwsign behind it | |
| 17:29:04 | melwitt | nova-apiuWSGI master and the workers | |
| 17:29:45 | melwitt | nova-apiuWSGI worker 1 nova-apiuWSGI worker 2 nova-apiuWSGI worker 3 | |
| 17:30:04 | sean-k-mooney | so i think those are the python interpreteres | |
| 17:30:16 | sean-k-mooney | that will be used to load the app on requets | |
| 17:31:21 | melwitt | yeah.. but we would want the interpreter to exit if the config raises ValueError or no? | |
| 17:42:44 | sean-k-mooney | i think that is the same behaivor we have for any other early check | |
| 17:42:50 | sean-k-mooney | so to me this is not unexpected | |
| 17:43:18 | melwitt | ok. yeah I'm slowly realizing this too | |
| 17:43:46 | sean-k-mooney | we may even have a exisitng "bug" for that as this feels vagly like familar ground | |
| 17:43:52 | melwitt | I was concerned if the app failing to load but the interpreter continues to run would cause any problems for an operator knowing that nova-api did not start properly or what | |
| 17:44:22 | sean-k-mooney | so it may | |
| 17:44:29 | sean-k-mooney | what is the status of the systemd service | |
| 17:44:43 | melwitt | it still says active and running :\ | |
| 17:44:46 | sean-k-mooney | (when i say it may i think this is already the case) | |
| 17:45:19 | sean-k-mooney | ack so without a real healthcheck i dont think this woudl be visable | |
| 17:45:31 | sean-k-mooney | but i woudl assuem the micro version endpoint does not work | |