| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-01-26 | |||
| 16:19:43 | alaski | dansmith: melwitt just caught part of scrollback from last night. I wanted BuildRequest.instance to be orphaned because I didn't want it treated like an instance, it's a holding place for what an instance should look like when it's created but isn't an instance itself. It's a subtle distinction made complicated by using an actual instance object there. I thought thinking of it that way would lead to | |
| 16:19:44 | alaski | fewer bugs. | |
| 16:20:02 | dansmith | alaski: right, I remember | |
| 16:20:07 | sfinucan | We got odd looks for wanting to play Call of Duty (COD) in past years too | |
| 16:20:13 | dansmith | alaski: I even went looking for where we had that convo, but it must have been in IRC | |
| 16:20:26 | alaski | dansmith: cool. I also said I would defer to those who were doing the work :) | |
| 16:20:29 | mfeoktistov | diana_clarke: ahaha! good track for presentation | |
| 16:20:36 | dansmith | alaski: s'all good now | |
| 16:22:16 | cfriesen | mdbooth: thanks for taking a look at the live-migration claims patch. It'd be good to finally get that stuff in. | |
| 16:22:18 | melwitt | alaski: yeah, once we realized what was happening, it was clear what to do | |
| 16:24:58 | alaski | dansmith: melwitt excellent | |
| 16:25:14 | melwitt | and I could see allowing it to masquerade as a normal Instance object could lead to a lot of subtle problems, if anything were missing from its fields | |
| 16:25:38 | dansmith | on the other hand, in reality, | |
| 16:25:48 | dansmith | we used that to smooth over where we got the instance, | |
| 16:26:02 | dansmith | so down the stack we've lost context (heh) about why it might not be a real one | |
| 16:26:54 | melwitt | yeah. I suspect if it had a real context, the problem would travel further down the stack and be really puzzling | |
| 16:27:16 | melwitt | *even further | |
| 16:27:24 | johnthetubaguy | melwitt: sorry, got distracted, which bits where you counting when you needed the cells again? | |
| 16:27:24 | dansmith | I dunno, the refresh should work if we have uuid and context | |
| 16:28:22 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: the counting patches counts instances, ram and cores from the cell db | |
| 16:28:36 | melwitt | johnthetubaguy: the ram and cores, and I tally the instances while counting ram/cores. ram and cores are being counted currently by pulling the instances and going through their flavor extra specs | |
| 16:28:44 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: if we lose connectivity with a cell for ten minutes, a user suddenly gets their quota back until we reconnect and could burn it in other cells | |
| 16:29:00 | johnthetubaguy | yeah, that makes sense | |
| 16:29:33 | melwitt | johnthetubaguy: the real plan is to call the placement api to get cores/ram count and use InstanceMappings for instances, but we can't get that from placement quite yet | |
| 16:30:01 | johnthetubaguy | melwitt: ah, true, well that to make placement do quota too ;) | |
| 16:30:09 | johnthetubaguy | s/to/or | |
| 16:30:48 | johnthetubaguy | melwitt: FWIW, its tempting to fail hard if a cell is down, and we know there is something in there we should be counting | |
| 16:30:57 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: how does that work? | |
| 16:31:11 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: if one cell is down, we can't do anything? that kinda defeats the purpose no? | |
| 16:31:21 | dansmith | well, s/do/create/ but .. | |
| 16:31:36 | melwitt | yeah, that seems like it would draw much ire | |
| 16:31:40 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 16:31:52 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: so, we can count instances in the api database, | |
| 16:32:04 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: which would leave just cores and ram as leaky if a whole cell went down | |
| 16:32:22 | dansmith | johnthetubaguy: which should be rare, and maybe some quota leakage isn't the worst thing in that case, given we will someday have placement do better | |
| 16:32:22 | johnthetubaguy | yeah, thats fair, if we did it that way, it feels less of a big deal | |
| 16:32:23 | dansmith | but I dunno | |
| 16:32:40 | dansmith | I feel like maybe that needs to be a question to the ops, but we have no time for that | |
| 16:32:46 | johnthetubaguy | yeah | |
| 16:33:28 | johnthetubaguy | honestly, feels like fail hard and don't care will be both be requested, depending on how much RAM and CPU quota matters to you | |
| 16:33:51 | johnthetubaguy | I like that the instance count one works just fine though | |
| 16:35:53 | melwitt | usually maybe the cores/ram leak stays bounded by the instances quota, but if someone has set unlimited instances and limited cores/ram, that would be a lot bigger problem | |
| 16:36:50 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 16:36:57 | dansmith | that's why asking the operators would be good | |
| 16:37:31 | sfinucan | mriedem: If /you're/ looking for something to do, could you take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/405954 at some point? | |
| 16:37:48 | mriedem | currently reviewing https://review.openstack.org/#/c/404472 | |
| 16:37:58 | mriedem | but i already had https://review.openstack.org/#/c/405954 in a tab | |
| 16:38:14 | dansmith | sfinucan: you know mriedem is on vacation right? I know, it's hard to tell | |
| 16:38:27 | sfinucan | a tab will do nicely | |
| 16:38:29 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: are you handling the change to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/404472/17/nova/compute/resource_tracker.py that you said you were looking at yesterday? | |
| 16:38:33 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: if not, I will do so. | |
| 16:38:41 | jaypipes_ | and good morning fellas. | |
| 16:38:46 | sfinucan | dansmith: I do. I've already given out to him for being around but he won't listen | |
| 16:38:56 | dansmith | sfinucan: he's not very good at vacation | |
| 16:39:11 | sfinucan | You Americans and your pesky work ethic | |
| 16:39:50 | sfinucan | We clearly need a Greek PTL | |
| 16:39:55 | jaypipes_ | lol | |
| 16:40:11 | jaypipes_ | my idea of vacation is doing code reviews by a pool. | |
| 16:40:46 | dansmith | mriedem: bauzas: that change is failing because it can't find placement.password | |
| 16:41:05 | kashyap | sfinucan: Quit giving those non-apologies | |
| 16:41:05 | bauzas | dansmith: yup, I'm working on a new PS | |
| 16:41:26 | dansmith | bauzas: you have a fix? | |
| 16:41:27 | kashyap | sfinucan: Reminds me about an article on the word 'humbled' in NY Times lately. ;-) | |
| 16:41:39 | mriedem | jaypipes: edleafe: just left some comments in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/404472/ | |
| 16:41:42 | bauzas | dansmith: by also excepting the NoConfOpt + modifying the ServiceFixture | |
| 16:41:44 | sfinucan | :D | |
| 16:41:44 | mriedem | jaypipes: i'm not all of the way through it yet | |
| 16:41:55 | mriedem | jaypipes: but the 'latest' microversion in the scheduler report client is what the -1 is for | |
| 16:42:02 | dansmith | bauzas: is that going to work? | |
| 16:42:05 | dansmith | bauzas: because it's failing to find it on a run that should have it | |
| 16:42:37 | bauzas | dansmith: if we ConfPatcher the ServiceFixture | |
| 16:42:37 | dansmith | bauzas: you might have to check the region name, since that's our conf opt | |
| 16:42:46 | dansmith | bauzas: it's failing in real devstack runs! | |
| 16:42:52 | dansmith | http://logs.openstack.org/61/417961/28/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/ed475f7/logs/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz?level=TRACE | |
| 16:42:54 | dansmith | bauzas: ^ | |
| 16:42:58 | bauzas | interesting | |
| 16:43:03 | cfriesen | jaypipes_: get a toughbook and you can do code reviews *in* the pool | |
| 16:43:06 | bauzas | anyway, I'm just splitting the big change | |
| 16:43:15 | dansmith | bauzas: I think it's because of lazy conf evaluation | |
| 16:44:06 | mriedem | NoSuchOptError: no such option password in group [placement] | |
| 16:44:09 | mriedem | that seems wonky | |
| 16:44:15 | edleafe | jaypipes_: yes, I fixed that already | |
| 16:44:24 | jaypipes_ | cfriesen: :) | |
| 16:44:49 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: ty sir | |
| 16:45:02 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: sorry was looking at an old rev comment | |
| 16:48:41 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: I don't want to step on toes if you are already working on it, so let me know if you are addressing mriedem's comments? | |
| 16:48:50 | johnthetubaguy | bauzas: I would try auth_url anyways, as password bit is pluggable | |
| 16:48:54 | edleafe | yeah, looking at them now | |
| 16:49:12 | johnthetubaguy | funky though, looks like it is there: http://logs.openstack.org/61/417961/28/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-full-ubuntu-xenial/ed475f7/logs/etc/nova/nova.conf.txt.gz | |
| 16:49:19 | edleafe | jaypipes_: aren't you suposed to be drinking pina coladas or something? | |
| 16:49:54 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: meh, coffee and email this morning :) | |
| 16:51:07 | cdent | jaypipes_: what about getting caught in the rain? | |
| 16:52:33 | dansmith | it's not even morning in florida anymore | |
| 16:52:51 | edleafe | jaypipes_: any idea about mriedem's comment here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/404472/20/nova/scheduler/client/report.py@174 | |
| 16:53:01 | edleafe | That got changed in PS 8 | |
| 16:55:58 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova: WIP: Allow graceful service exits from compute https://review.openstack.org/425751 | |
| 16:57:12 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: I don't see that changed in PS8. but anyway, it's likely just an oversight. There were so many patches that changed that line that I've lost track at this point which introduced latest and which introduced 1.X specified explicitly. | |
| 16:57:32 | jaypipes_ | edleafe: in this particular case, it should be the microversion that added resource classes, so 1.2, yes? | |
| 16:58:02 | edleafe | jaypipes_: not sure, but that sounds about right | |
| 16:58:54 | bauzas | johnthetubaguy: dansmith: so I made the spit | |