| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-01-20 | |||
| 08:38:53 | gibi | tdurakov: looking... | |
| 08:45:05 | gibi | tdurakov: I'm wondering why this not cause any notification sample test to fail | |
| 08:45:44 | tdurakov | gibi, good question, I think we need to change functional tests that verify these templates | |
| 08:46:21 | tdurakov | I'd expect it compares 2 json objects, where timestamps are already converted to datetime.datetime objects | |
| 08:46:30 | tdurakov | or smth. like that | |
| 08:48:05 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova: Add ComputeNodeList.get_all_by_uuids method https://review.openstack.org/418134 | |
| 08:48:06 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova: WIP: Scheduler calling the Placement API https://review.openstack.org/417961 | |
| 08:49:14 | tdurakov | gibi: so, what do you think about this change? | |
| 08:49:41 | tdurakov | is it worth merging it, and then figure out what's wrong with tests | |
| 08:50:08 | gibi | tdurakov: direction is good. I'm worried about the test and we might have to look in not just the instance.update code path but the instance.<action> pathes as well | |
| 08:51:39 | tdurakov | gibi, could you please leave a comment with details? | |
| 08:51:56 | gibi | tdurakov: will do | |
| 08:53:00 | tdurakov | gibi: maybe you could explain me, why nova handles some fields explicilty? I'd expect it should be done by serializer | |
| 08:56:16 | gibi | tdurakov: what do you mean by explicitly in this context? | |
| 08:56:42 | tdurakov | gibi: conversion of datetime objects to string | |
| 08:56:49 | tdurakov | for example | |
| 08:57:44 | tdurakov | gibi: we briefly discussed this patch with mriedem yesterday, what do you think about version bump for this change | |
| 08:59:40 | gibi | the explicit conversion was part of the legacy notification (for example in case of audit fields) and during the versioned transformation we did not changed that | |
| 09:00:22 | gibi | I personally didn't want to change the legacy code path of the instance.update | |
| 09:00:32 | gibi | to avoid behavior change in the legacy | |
| 09:01:14 | gibi | unfortunately I also piggybacked on that legacy implementation so the explicitness become the part of the versioned path as well | |
| 09:01:27 | gibi | regarding the version bump | |
| 09:01:45 | gibi | as far as I understand we didn't use to bump api versions for bugfixes | |
| 09:02:01 | gibi | but here bumping a version is a lot cheaper | |
| 09:02:08 | gibi | than in the apu | |
| 09:02:09 | gibi | api | |
| 09:03:00 | gibi | btw you patch now changes the legacy instance.update as well | |
| 09:06:26 | tdurakov | gibi, should I worry about that? | |
| 09:06:37 | tdurakov | about the legacy instance.update | |
| 09:08:19 | diga | gibi: Hi | |
| 09:08:40 | diga | I am writting spec for placement notification now | |
| 09:08:53 | diga | gibi: have some questions on that | |
| 09:12:40 | openstackgerrit | Wang Qing wu proposed openstack/nova: Introduce base PowerVM driver (console) https://review.openstack.org/409402 | |
| 09:15:31 | diga | gibi: I need to bring all the resource provider field inside the versioned objects, correct ? | |
| 09:16:27 | openstackgerrit | Claudiu Belu proposed openstack/nova: Hyper-V PCI Passthrough https://review.openstack.org/420614 | |
| 09:22:03 | gmann | bauzas: just this merge will work on py35 failure - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/422323/ | |
| 09:22:09 | gmann | no rebase i think | |
| 09:22:26 | gibi | tdurakov: this might cause pain for the legacy consumers as the date is now in different format | |
| 09:23:09 | gibi | tdurakov: but I think the legacy notification causes this kind of pain all the time so I think we can ignore it | |
| 09:23:14 | tdurakov | gibi, honestly I'd expect current approach cause more pain | |
| 09:23:33 | tdurakov | gibi: ++ | |
| 09:23:37 | gibi | tdurakov: agree | |
| 09:24:05 | gibi | diga: hi! good question | |
| 09:24:33 | gibi | diga: I think we have to judge how usefull a field for the notification consumer | |
| 09:24:46 | diga | gibi: :) okay | |
| 09:25:08 | gibi | diga: I suggest propose what you think is usefull and then in the spec review the placement guys can suggest improvements there | |
| 09:25:28 | diga | gibi: Yep | |
| 09:25:34 | diga | gibi: I will send one WIP spec today, just have a look at it | |
| 09:25:42 | gibi | tdurakov: shall I look into the sample test problem or you will check that? | |
| 09:25:49 | diga | gibi: that will be good approach | |
| 09:25:54 | gibi | diga: good, I will try to check it | |
| 09:26:16 | tdurakov | gibi, I'll check, but I think it worth to do it separately | |
| 09:27:16 | diga | gibi: Thanks :) | |
| 09:27:56 | gibi | tdurakov: OK let's do that separately | |
| 09:29:34 | tdurakov | gibi, could you please +-1 the change with a fix | |
| 09:31:00 | gibi | tdurakov: just did +1 it :) | |
| 09:31:06 | gibi | with the comments we agreed | |
| 09:31:18 | tdurakov | gibi, thank you! | |
| 09:31:40 | gibi | tdurakov: thank you for fixing the bug! :) | |
| 09:53:09 | gibi | tdurakov: just checked the #2) comment and I can confirm that instance.<action> notifications are not affected | |
| 09:54:18 | tdurakov | ok, cool, thank you | |
| 10:01:37 | openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/422323 | |
| 10:06:35 | openstackgerrit | Sergey Nikitin proposed openstack/nova: do not merge https://review.openstack.org/422841 | |
| 10:06:40 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova: Avoid forcing translation on logging calls https://review.openstack.org/413876 | |
| 10:10:10 | openstackgerrit | Duong Ha-Quang proposed openstack/nova: Stop using mox stubs in nova/tests/unit/cells/fakes.py https://review.openstack.org/342043 | |
| 10:11:14 | openstackgerrit | Duong Ha-Quang proposed openstack/nova: Stop using mox stubs in nova/tests/unit/cells/fakes.py https://review.openstack.org/342043 | |
| 10:20:14 | openstackgerrit | Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/nova: PoC: add hierarchy quota driver https://review.openstack.org/391072 | |
| 10:26:56 | openstackgerrit | Pawel Koniszewski proposed openstack/nova: live-mig: Add claims and proper resource tracking https://review.openstack.org/244489 | |
| 10:26:58 | openstackgerrit | Pawel Koniszewski proposed openstack/nova: libvirt: pass libvirt reference methods to migration https://review.openstack.org/328997 | |
| 10:26:58 | openstackgerrit | Pawel Koniszewski proposed openstack/nova: libvirt: live-migrate updates NUMA and cpus in the XML https://review.openstack.org/286744 | |
| 10:49:40 | bauzas | alex_xu: around ? | |
| 10:50:11 | bauzas | alex_xu: I was working on the scheduler change when I saw that we haven't yet a fixture for calling the placement api | |
| 10:50:38 | bauzas | so some of the functional tests are failing because we return NoValidHosts | |
| 10:51:32 | bauzas | alex_xu: I was thinking of very quickly writing a fixture, but given we don't run the WSGI app for placement the same than OSAPI, then I'm a bit sad | |
| 10:52:09 | bauzas | alex_xu: do you know if there is some way to hack that by having a WSGI server fixture able to deploy a WSGI app ? | |
| 10:52:52 | bauzas | and sean is off, I can't ask advice from him | |
| 10:53:08 | sahid | jaypipes: hello, i lost your +2 on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/400874/ because of a conflict if I can get it again that would be nice since next week (if i remember correclty) you will be out | |
| 10:54:54 | openstackgerrit | Wang Qing wu proposed openstack/nova: WIP(4): Introduce base PowerVM driver (cfg drv) https://review.openstack.org/409404 | |
| 11:02:15 | lyarwood | Morning all, if anyone has time I'd appreciate some additional reviews on the following findmnt bugfix - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/420146/ | |
| 11:42:49 | bauzas | sdague: I think I come up with a potential problem for us wanting to get the placement upcall from the scheduler | |
| 11:43:14 | bauzas | sdague: we haven't yet a fixture for running the placement API in our functional tests | |
| 11:43:26 | bauzas | sdague: thoughts on the best approach ? | |
| 11:43:40 | bauzas | sdague: I began to look at to embed the WSGI app into a fixture | |
| 11:43:53 | bauzas | to look at how* | |
| 11:44:14 | bauzas | since we can't reuse the OSAPIFixture, as it's a totally different structure AFAICS | |
| 11:46:50 | bauzas | sdague: maybe using paste.fixture ? | |
| 11:57:50 | sdague | bauzas: are, right, no oslo.service | |
| 11:58:06 | sdague | so... my suggestion, spawn a thread and run the app inside https://docs.python.org/2/library/wsgiref.html#module-wsgiref.simple_server | |
| 11:58:35 | bauzas | not sure I understood your first point ? | |
| 11:58:47 | bauzas | "no oslo service " | |
| 11:59:00 | bauzas | you mean that indeed the placement service is not oslo's | |
| 11:59:02 | sdague | placement doesn't launch through oslo.service | |
| 11:59:06 | bauzas | yeah | |
| 11:59:23 | sdague | oslo.service gave us the ability to just run in a greenlet | |
| 11:59:28 | bauzas | okay, so you'd recommend wsgiref instead of paste.fixture ? | |
| 11:59:44 | sdague | well, paste doesn't actually listen | |
| 12:00:08 | bauzas | okay, disclaimer, I'm not a super expert on that | |
| 12:00:16 | bauzas | so okay, using wsgiref | |
| 12:00:25 | bauzas | given the short time we have, I'm rushing | |
| 12:00:45 | bauzas | sdague: I'll just use a thread in the fixture and do like the above you mentioned ^ | |