Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2024-11-26
16:32:50 sean-k-mooney but we shoudl dicuss this more async
16:33:22 s3rj1k no prob, thanks sean-k-mooney for taking a lead on explaining
16:34:28 bauzas I have to admit that none of that tribal knowledge is written in https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/admin/scheduling.html
16:34:43 sean-k-mooney its also not in the config option
16:35:01 sean-k-mooney i left my inital feedback on the bug when i traged it as opion
16:35:30 sean-k-mooney i dint make it as invlaid as i tought we shoudl atelast dicuss it more widely first
16:36:01 bauzas for now, we should document that active-passive HA configuration for sure
16:36:16 sean-k-mooney for the perodic only
16:36:19 bauzas because indeed, we know that there is no eventual consistency betwen schedulers
16:36:27 sean-k-mooney the schduler shoudl be generally deploy active active
16:36:42 bauzas that's your opinion :)
16:36:44 sean-k-mooney but also the perodic has perfomance issuues
16:36:50 sean-k-mooney bauzas: its waht we use in our product
16:36:58 sean-k-mooney and what almost all instller do by defult
16:37:42 bauzas https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/abandoned/parallel-scheduler.html
16:37:53 tkajinam yeah > almost all installer do by default
16:38:11 sean-k-mooney that a diffent proposal
16:38:36 bauzas I litterally quote the first sentence of that spec :
16:38:42 bauzas "If you running two nova-scheduler processes they race each other, they don’t find out about each others choices until the DB gets updated by the nova-compute resource tracker. This has lead to many deployments opting for an Active/Passive HA setup for the nova-scheduler process."
16:39:10 tkajinam people may not prefer using act-act for simplicity and avoid clustering mechanism to implement active-passive.
16:39:24 tkajinam without large warning :-P
16:39:31 sean-k-mooney bauzas: that does not really apply as of placement
16:39:55 sean-k-mooney bauzas: i woudl condier it to be very incorrect advice to deocument that active active is not supported
16:40:50 gibi yeah the goal of placement to shrink the race window between parallel schedulers
16:41:07 gibi it is a solved problem for those resources that are tracked in placement
16:41:13 bauzas I don't disagree with the fact that HA active-active schedulers is a problem to solve
16:41:30 gibi for those that are not tracked there, the compute manager has a lock around claim to prevent overallocation
16:41:36 gibi and we have alternatives to reschedule
16:41:50 bauzas gibi: exactly, hence the A/P mechanism
16:41:57 gibi no this is A A
16:42:10 gibi the only A P problem is in the periodic discovery
16:42:13 bauzas in the very early times, we were considering reschedules as a way to address the problem
16:42:38 bauzas we stopped that tenet by wanting to reduce the reschedules, leading to indeed a broader problem
16:43:10 gibi we reduced reschedules with placement
16:43:16 bauzas originally, the scheduler wasn't intended to provide an exact solution
16:43:21 gibi and we improved reschedules with alterntive generation
16:43:30 bauzas right, which is why we never solved that problem
16:43:46 bauzas we reduced the scope of reschedules, that's it
16:43:49 sean-k-mooney we solved it to the point that we recomemnd active active as the defualt
16:43:50 gibi in a distributes system you have limits what you can solve exactly
16:44:11 gibi I agree with sean-k-mooney we can recomend A A
16:44:19 gibi actually OSP 18 does A A A
16:44:43 sean-k-mooney right our product does not supprot active passive but i belive that was true in 17 as well
16:44:43 gibi (or as many As as you want :D)
16:44:45 bauzas A A A is OK to me with resources tracked by placement
16:45:16 sean-k-mooney anyway perhasp we should move on?
16:45:23 bauzas agreed
16:45:28 sean-k-mooney we can talk about this more but proably dont need to in the meeting
16:45:32 bauzas and agreed on the fact we need a spec
16:45:43 bauzas but maybe the solution is to add more resources to placement
16:46:01 sean-k-mooney well that is the general direction anyway
16:46:04 bauzas or consider this as a non-solvable problem and accepting reschedules as a caveart
16:46:07 bauzas caveat
16:46:11 sean-k-mooney but that does not adress the reporte problem
16:46:17 gibi on the proposal of a distributed discover I can suggest to do the discover outside of a scheduler periodic to avoid the race
16:46:19 sean-k-mooney nova-audit would
16:46:28 bauzas anyway, moving on
16:46:31 sean-k-mooney gibi: yes its very diffent
16:46:41 sean-k-mooney bauzas: ack so i had one quick topic
16:46:41 bauzas s3rj1k: fancy writing a spec ?
16:46:47 bauzas sean-k-mooney: shoot
16:46:51 s3rj1k gibi: similar issue would be with CLI, check out RFE
16:47:05 s3rj1k bauzas: will do
16:47:12 sean-k-mooney so last week i raised adding rodolfo to os-vif core
16:47:23 sean-k-mooney i sent a mail to the list and no one objected
16:47:24 gibi s3rj1k: I mean if you control to only run the discover from a single CLI session at a time then I assume there is no race
16:47:37 sean-k-mooney so if there is no other objection here i will proceed with that after the call.
16:48:01 s3rj1k gibi: yes, need external control on how CLI gets run
16:48:16 s3rj1k lets move on, yes
16:48:31 gibi sean-k-mooney: no objection on my side
16:48:51 bauzas sean-k-mooney: no objections indeed
16:49:17 sean-k-mooney ack so that is all i had
16:49:36 tkajinam I have no objections but +1 :-) (I'm not a core, though)
16:50:18 sean-k-mooney ill send a mail to the list and then ill add them after that
16:50:37 sean-k-mooney jsut to keep a record of it beyond this meeting
16:51:59 bauzas ++
16:52:07 bauzas okay, then I think we're done for today
16:52:11 bauzas anything else ?
16:52:39 bauzas looks not
16:52:44 bauzas have a good end of day
16:52:47 bauzas thanks all
16:52:50 opendevmeet Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2024/nova.2024-11-26-16.00.log.html
16:52:50 opendevmeet Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2024/nova.2024-11-26-16.00.txt
16:52:50 opendevmeet Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2024/nova.2024-11-26-16.00.html
16:52:50 opendevmeet Meeting ended Tue Nov 26 16:52:50 2024 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
16:52:50 bauzas #endmeeting
16:52:54 s3rj1k thanks all
16:52:56 tkajinam thanks !
16:53:28 tkajinam nothing urgent but I've added a few patches to drop deprecated/unmaintained deps to review priority list just fyi
16:53:42 elodilles thanks o/
16:54:03 gibi o/
17:16:27 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Show candidate combinatorial explosion by dev number https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/855885
17:26:07 opendevreview Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: Add unit test coverage of get_machine_ips https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/936287
19:01:04 opendevreview Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add spec for show scheduler hints in server details https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/936140
19:14:37 opendevreview Andrei Yachmenev proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Dynamic disk qos updates support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/936302
20:24:37 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for remaining server action APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/915743
#openstack-nova - 2024-11-27
10:14:19 opendevreview Nisha Brahmankar proposed openstack/nova master: Retain port binding profile after live migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/936338
10:26:43 opendevreview Nisha Brahmankar proposed openstack/nova master: Retain port binding profile after live migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/936338
11:21:44 opendevreview Ivan Tkachuk proposed openstack/nova master: Reduce calls to qemu-img for disk_info https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/936246
12:52:58 dviroel hi there nova folks. I would like to request reviews on this nova spec: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/936140

Earlier   Later