Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-01-11
15:21:22 bauzas artom: yup, I understand
15:21:27 bauzas artom: me too honestly
15:21:39 bauzas fortunately, it's not a RPC API
15:21:56 bauzas so probably we could just add it now and discuss later on how to have a better argument
15:22:16 artom bauzas, I'll definitely update the docstring though
15:23:25 mriedem gibi: did you have a bug for the versioned notifications lazy-load issue?
15:24:33 gibi mriedem: yes
15:24:47 gibi mriedem: here it is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/415857/
15:25:07 mriedem thanks
15:29:10 cdent snikitin: I left these as a comment, but how come the new NovaObject based DiskDiagnostics doesn't get an id, when the old one did?
15:32:36 openstackgerrit John Garbutt proposed openstack/nova: Pass objects into _validate_requested_network_ids https://review.openstack.org/418027
15:34:48 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: Plumbing for tagged nic attachment https://review.openstack.org/415622
15:34:49 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: Libvirt support for tagged volume attachment https://review.openstack.org/418100
15:34:49 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: Plumbing for tagged volume attachment https://review.openstack.org/391941
15:34:50 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: API support for tagged device attachment https://review.openstack.org/376021
15:34:50 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova: Libvirt support for tagged nic attachment https://review.openstack.org/415520
15:35:13 openstackgerrit Christopher Martin proposed openstack/nova: Stop using mox in test_compute_cells.py https://review.openstack.org/389750
15:47:24 artom mriedem, heya - you mentioned bumping the RPC version for the tagged attachment patches. I'm wondering whether I squish both volume and nic stuff into one patch and have a bigger patch but only one version bump, or keep it split for easier to digest patches but 2 version bumps (one for each, nic and volume)
15:47:41 artom s/squish/squash/ (though squish is funnier)
15:48:05 openstackgerrit Sivasathurappan Radhakrishnan proposed openstack/nova: Refactor _post_live_migratiion https://review.openstack.org/413021
15:49:25 openstackgerrit Sarafraj Singh proposed openstack/nova: Add service_token for nova-cinder interaction https://review.openstack.org/397399
15:50:08 mriedem cdent: that came up in the spec review, i asked the same thing, i think it was ultimately decided that the disk id wasn't useful, but we could add one in later if needed, i.e. via bdm uuid or something
15:50:36 cdent so how do you tell one disk from another?
15:50:58 mriedem cdent: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357884/ if it helps
15:51:29 mriedem cdent: yeah i asked the same questions in the spec review
15:51:37 mriedem would have to go back through the conversation on that review to get the answer
15:51:38 cdent heh :)
15:52:40 cdent the gist appears to be: we never had good info there in the first place, and making it could be expensive, so we'll get rid of it for now
15:52:43 mriedem cdent: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357884/9/specs/ocata/approved/restore-vm-diagnostics.rst@142
15:52:53 cdent sort-of-jinx
15:53:50 mriedem i'm pretty sure we also asked if/how people were using it in the ops list and didn't get much of a response
15:53:54 mriedem so we're kind of flying blind
15:54:53 mriedem there was some response i guess http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2016-October/011793.html
15:55:02 openstackgerrit Sarafraj Singh proposed openstack/nova: WIP: Add service_token for nova-glance interaction https://review.openstack.org/412634
15:55:30 mriedem cdent: so i guess people use it as a poor mans way of bypassing ceilometer?
15:55:43 mriedem even though it's entire existence in the first place is for ceilometer i believe
15:55:44 cdent apparently ceilometer is now going to be using something to bypass nova ;)
15:55:47 mriedem dragon added it way back when
15:55:52 mriedem nice
15:56:13 cdent yeah, chaos everywhere, cats and dogs, etc
16:01:42 openstackgerrit Pawel Koniszewski proposed openstack/nova: Add new configuration option live_migration_scheme https://review.openstack.org/410817
16:12:11 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova: WIP: Test cellsv1 https://review.openstack.org/418141
16:15:57 mriedem wow, sudafed + 2 cups of coffee and i feel like a changed man
16:16:00 mriedem thanks drugs!
16:16:52 dansmith sudafed ftw
16:16:58 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova: Update notification for flavor https://review.openstack.org/413846
16:21:04 artom Breaking news: open source project leader secretly a drug addict.
16:21:49 cdent I think we'd be more surprised about an open source project leader that wasn't a drug addict
16:23:57 bauzas I need to be AFK for a few hours but will be back around 2000UTC
16:24:40 gibi mriedem: regarding https://review.openstack.org/#/c/413846/ not only flavor.project but flavor.extra_specs is also missing from the emitted payload
16:25:01 gibi mriedem: but it is expected to be solved by the same bug fix
16:25:19 bauzas in the meatime, I'd appreciate some reviews for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/392569/25
16:25:30 bauzas ^ placement API microversion for RP get
16:25:37 bauzas folks , \o
16:26:11 markus_z mriedem: Hand on heart, the newton backports for fixing live-migration with serial console won't make it, right? https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/newton+topic:%22bug+1455252%22
16:26:49 markus_z I will only cry a little if you say "yes"
16:26:54 mriedem gibi: you forgot that flavor.extra_specs is loaded up by default when we pull the flavor from the database https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/fd91a25324b7b7fed1f3f10c5b56668b20a170f4/nova/objects/flavor.py#L402
16:27:00 mriedem gibi: that one is the special snowflake
16:27:31 mriedem markus_z: hand on whose heart? mine or yours?
16:27:52 markus_z mine of course ;P (probably I got the idiom wrong)
16:28:57 gibi mriedem: but it is still not shows up in the flavor.create payload
16:29:07 gibi mriedem: which seems contradicting to me
16:29:16 mriedem markus_z: i just have reservations about that one given the size of the series, the conflicts, and all of the kerfuffle around that stuff in newton, like i thought there were other things going on related to that series in newton, - it was just really hard to sort out at the time
16:29:38 mriedem markus_z: so i'd need someone that was much closer to how all of that went down in newton to vouch for it, like pkoniszewski
16:29:57 mriedem gibi: well flavor create is different
16:30:03 mriedem the known issue in that reno is talking about the instance payload
16:30:06 mriedem not flavor.create
16:30:20 mriedem instance payload will have the flavor sub-object based on Flavor.get_by_*
16:30:25 mriedem which loads extra_specs
16:31:28 mriedem hmm, why are we running a functional py35 job when it's just going to always fail/
16:31:33 mriedem seems like a waste of resources
16:31:41 mriedem dims: ^? since gcb isn't around.
16:32:21 gibi mriedem: sorry I still not get it. neither flavor.create nor instance.<action> samples shows the flavor.extra_specs but your reference points out that it is loaded. This seems a bug to me
16:32:49 markus_z pkoniszewski: Do you see a chance to have a look at those patches for stable newton? https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/newton+topic:%22bug+1455252%22 When there are concerns about the risks, I'm fully OK with abandoning them.
16:33:22 mriedem gibi: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/413846/10/doc/notification_samples/instance-create-end.json
16:33:28 mriedem that has the extra_specs key in the payload
16:33:41 mriedem it's just empty, because the fake flavor used in those tests don't have any extra specs :)
16:33:59 nik__ cdent, thank you for review! I fixed you comments
16:34:32 cdent cool, will go back and have a look
16:35:12 gibi mriedem: you are right my eyes ticked me
16:35:17 mriedem gibi: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/fd91a25324b7b7fed1f3f10c5b56668b20a170f4/nova/tests/functional/notification_sample_tests/notification_sample_base.py#L138
16:35:22 gibi mriedem: instance.<action> has the extra spec
16:35:35 mriedem yeah, so if we added an extra spec to that fake flavor those instance samples would have it
16:35:55 mriedem it might be a nice clarification to add that in a separate change
16:36:05 mriedem hw:watchdog_action=disable or something
16:37:22 artom mriedem, I guess you missed my question earlier about 2 rpc versions bumps but smaller patches vs 1 bump but bigger patch in the tagged attachment series. Any opinions, or shall I plow on with what I think is best and let code review sort it out later?
16:37:44 gibi mriedem: I agree, let's add that in a separate patch
16:39:08 gibi mriedem: so what is left over the existing reno limitation is that the flavor.create doesn't have the projects and the extra_specs field but I assume that the lazy-load bugfix will solve that as well
16:40:13 mriedem gibi: do you feel the need to update that release note to get into that amount of detail?
16:40:31 mriedem gibi: on flavor create i don't think we have access or extra specs anyway, as those are different APIs to update an existing flavor
16:41:06 gibi mriedem: I think the current patch can go in, worst case we add another reno if the bug fix does not solve the flavor.create
16:41:35 mriedem gibi: ok but like i said, flavor.create won't have access or extra specs,
16:41:40 mriedem those aren't available when the flavor is created
16:41:47 mriedem those are later POST actions on an existing flavor
16:41:47 pkoniszewski markus_z: yeah, added series to my TODO list for tomorrow
16:41:50 mriedem so those would be update notifications
16:42:06 mriedem artom: i think i'd prefer separate
16:42:24 mriedem artom: that series is easier to review when we're dealing with bdms and vifs separately
16:42:44 mriedem but that's just me
16:43:06 artom mriedem, I think I agree

Earlier   Later