Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2025-09-10
11:29:23 sean-k-mooney tkajinam: it is but it wont offilaly be supproted until next cycle aka friday
11:30:24 sean-k-mooney tkajinam: once master is reopend im hoping ot finish the work that was started to supprot it in devstack and swap the nova-hybird-plug job form 12 to 13
11:32:15 tkajinam sean-k-mooney, yeah that's true
11:32:20 tkajinam due to python version
11:33:12 sean-k-mooney https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/954653
11:33:21 sean-k-mooney tkajinam: no
11:33:36 sean-k-mooney becuase we select the supproted plathforms before the release starts
11:33:47 sean-k-mooney and it was not release at the start of 2025.2
11:33:58 sean-k-mooney openstack seams to work fine on it
11:33:58 tkajinam yeah that's true
11:34:07 sean-k-mooney but it will be an offical testign runtime form friday
11:34:12 tkajinam though I thought Trixie uses python 3.13
11:34:28 tkajinam I understand what you mean
11:37:02 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: hypervisors: Optimize uptime retrieval for better performance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/959604
11:37:15 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Update Debian qemu/libvirt/libguestfs versions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/930444
11:43:41 opendevreview Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2044235 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960349
11:56:06 gibi Uggla: sean-k-mooney: elodilles: I've sent the question about pyroute2 req rollback to ML and proposed the req patch. https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/FFYMQTJPJREQZ2P32HGS5HE2NLTXHVUC/ and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/960366
12:05:06 zigo Your thoughts ?
12:05:06 zigo So I wonder, would the team agree for a feature to disallow spawning an instance with boot from volume, if it is with a flavor that has a system disk? Of course, that would be only an option (or a policy ?) and we could keep the usual old (permissive) behavior of the Nova API.
12:05:06 zigo However, there's a problem when customers are doing a boot from volume, and select a flavor that includes a system disk. In this case, they get billed for something they will never be able to use.
12:05:06 zigo At my company, we bill instances depending on their resources. ie: if you want a 20GB system disk, you get billed (linearly) for it. Nothing special here.
12:05:06 zigo Hi there!
12:12:10 elodilles gibi: ACK, thanks o/ let's see if we get an answer for req folks
12:12:19 elodilles s/for/from
12:43:05 sean-k-mooney zigo: just reading back
12:44:13 sean-k-mooney zigo: what do you mean by 20GB system disk, do you mean a flavor with nova provisioned storage i.e. root_GB and/or ephmeral_GB >0
12:45:34 sean-k-mooney zigo: i advocated for blockign BFV instnace form using flavor with root_gb >0 when we prevented non boot form volume instance using flavors with root_gb=0
12:45:57 sean-k-mooney zigo: in the past it was consier too large of a upgrade impact for exisign clouds to make that change
12:46:15 sean-k-mooney zigo: i dont think we can jsut block it. but what we coudl do is add a policy rule for it
12:46:39 sean-k-mooney we have a policy rule for allowing non BFV guest to use falvoar with 0 root_gb
12:47:17 sean-k-mooney we could add one for BFV with flavors that are not 0
12:47:38 sean-k-mooney and then you could configure that to @ or a specific rule other then member
12:48:12 sean-k-mooney i dont recally if '@' is the sentenil for no one or everyoen but we have sental values for both
12:48:20 sean-k-mooney zigo: would somethign like that work for you
12:49:02 sean-k-mooney zigo: one thing that we should not break is bfv with non-zero ephmeral_gb
12:49:56 sean-k-mooney that is often sued to have the root disk run form say ceph while having an addtion ephmeral disk that uses fast local storage, i.e. for ectd or fast local scratch space
12:50:20 zigo "we could add one for BFV with flavors that are not 0" <--- That's what I would like, yes.
12:51:08 zigo Can it be done with an existing deployment already ?
12:51:09 sean-k-mooney gmaan is on pto but i think that woudl be consitent with our exisitng policies
12:51:47 sean-k-mooney yes so the policy rule change woudl jsut prevent you creatin new instnace in that state or resizing to that state
12:52:02 sean-k-mooney so existing workload woudl contiue to work
12:52:41 sean-k-mooney but if folks use heat/tereform ectra to automate deployment then it woudl break there automation
12:52:42 zigo Ok, I'll search how to do it then.
12:53:03 sean-k-mooney i.e. if they refence specifc flavors
12:53:05 sean-k-mooney oh
12:53:11 sean-k-mooney your asking if it cna be done today
12:53:17 sean-k-mooney zigo: sorry no
12:53:34 sean-k-mooney zigo: ill doubel check but i belive we dont have the policy rule today
12:54:30 zigo Ok.
12:54:39 sean-k-mooney https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/policies/servers.py#L288-L312
12:55:04 sean-k-mooney that the existing one we have which does not do what you want but it prevent using an iamge with a 0 disk flavor
12:55:19 sean-k-mooney we need to add the inverse
12:55:44 sean-k-mooney zigo: the related config option is https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#DEFAULT.max_local_block_devices
12:56:29 sean-k-mooney what you could do modify the flavor that have local disk with a forbiden trait
12:57:03 sean-k-mooney then you could set DEFAULT.max_local_block_devices=0 on a subset of hosts adn use provider.yaml or the api to add a trait to those hosts
12:57:19 sean-k-mooney you could also do thie with the aggrate flavor extra specs filter
12:57:42 sean-k-mooney that woudl turn the combinaiton yuou want to block into a no valid host
12:57:56 sean-k-mooney honelsy however that is not a good solution for an existing cloud
12:58:15 sean-k-mooney that really intended fo diskless blade servers
12:58:29 zigo Thanks a lot, that's helpful.
12:58:40 sean-k-mooney zigo: there is one other non nova thing you coudl consider
12:58:54 sean-k-mooney currently i guess your doing flavor based billing
12:59:09 sean-k-mooney actully it might now work
12:59:25 sean-k-mooney i was going ot say you could look at the allocation in palcemetn,
12:59:27 zigo Yes we are doing flavor based billing.
12:59:41 zigo And today, a customer complained he was billed for a system disk he's not able to use.
13:00:02 sean-k-mooney i belive ofr BFV guest the allcoation for the instnace will not have disk as part of it for BFV guests
13:00:16 zigo It's his fault, but for a definitive fix, we should just forbid doing that.
13:01:02 sean-k-mooney well that debatable nova supprot this but yes you need to acount for that in the billing system as a result
13:02:48 sean-k-mooney anyway nova zeros out the root disk storage form the flavor for bfv guest in palcement so if you wanted too you shoudl be able ot sue that to bill more acurratly until a new policy rule is intorduced
13:03:20 sean-k-mooney zigo: would you mind crating a blueprint for this or adding a ptg topic so we have somethign to dicuss and track this request
13:04:13 sean-k-mooney i dont know if other woudl want a small spec for this but we can dicuss that in the irc meeting once we have a blueprint.
13:28:01 zigo sean-k-mooney: Will do, thanks for your input !
14:36:23 dansmith gibi: so on the the s-g parallelize thing.. in fixing the last few tests, I think I've realized that the accounting for the "batches" test(s) was so off because of the sequential processing
14:36:36 dansmith sort of a "yeah, duh" moment
14:38:55 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Fix bug 2114951 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952895
14:48:06 gibi dansmith: :)
14:50:33 dansmith the downside is that the behavior becomes a little less deterministic (as expected) so I'm having to change assertions a bit
15:29:30 sean-k-mooney gibi: so lookign at https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/release-management.html#milestone-3-feature-freeze the requirements freeze starts at m3 and is unfozent on master after the stable branch of the requirement repos created at https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/release-management.html#release-2
15:31:22 sean-k-mooney gibi: so taht woudl imply its too late to rolback pyroute2 however i have no idea regarding your other question fo can this happen on stable/2025.2, my gut feeling is no becuase it could break released packages based on rc1 or the ga release, or at the very least cause the pyroute2 package to need a downgrade
15:32:11 sean-k-mooney with that said im not sure so thanks for sending that email again
16:14:09 gibi yeah I feel we need to roll forward once we have a pyroute2 fix both on master and stable/2025.2 I hope rolling forward will be OK on stable
16:32:56 opendevreview Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Drop GLANCE_STANDALONE https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960404
17:00:33 sean-k-mooney gibi: my understanding is we are not allowed to raise minversion but we can increase max
17:01:04 sean-k-mooney so it shoudl be ok as long as theyre is no breaking change
17:01:41 sean-k-mooney its not something i have seen us do often however so im not very familar with the critia that is applied
18:30:20 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2025.1: hypervisors: Optimize uptime retrieval for better performance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960409
18:34:11 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: hypervisors: Optimize uptime retrieval for better performance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960410
18:35:00 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.1: hypervisors: Optimize uptime retrieval for better performance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960411
21:12:24 opendevreview Cyril Roelandt proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Drop GLANCE_STANDALONE https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960404
#openstack-nova - 2025-09-11
09:03:17 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Add Flamingo prelude section https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/959188
09:32:32 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Test patch removing glance standalone https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960446
12:32:38 opendevreview OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2025.2: Update .gitreview for stable/2025.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/960507
12:32:40 opendevreview OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2025.2: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/2025.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/960508
12:32:41 opendevreview OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement master: Update master for stable/2025.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/960509
12:34:15 opendevreview Thomas Goirand proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Restrict booting from volume with disk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/960513
12:34:38 zigo sean-k-mooney: It's the first time I'm writing a spec, I hope it's ok...
13:09:42 jlejeune sean-k-mooney: gibi: Hello, I recently resumed my work on bug #2044235. You asked me to create a regression test to confirm the bug, but I'm having trouble reproducing it. When I raise the messagingTimeout exception from the ‘check_can_live_migrate_source’ method, it seems like this exception is caught by the fake transport driver, causing my test to fail. When I try with any other exception,
13:09:48 jlejeune my test works fine. Have you ever seen this behavior before?
13:11:50 sean-k-mooney zigo: you removed section instead of jsut say None so that is why pep8 is failing

Earlier   Later