Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-02-03
17:11:06 johnthetubaguy cdent: totally with you on that
17:11:08 pumaranikar cdent, looking at wsgify class.
17:11:19 cdent it might, however, be less messy than what I'm thinking. won't really know until we try it
17:11:26 johnthetubaguy cdent: +1
17:11:34 cdent pumaranikar: I think overriding the call_fun method might work
17:15:55 johnthetubaguy cdent: I was curious on your gabbi thoughts too, this seemed the simplest way to ensure the formatter was present: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/395194/5/nova/tests/functional/api/openstack/placement/gabbits/allocations.yaml@158
17:16:45 cdent johnthetubaguy: yeah, pretty much that's it. look for a key and value that wouldn't be there if the formatter was not swinging
17:18:09 EmilienM mriedem: yes it's IPv6. Do you test nova in ipv6?
17:18:40 EmilienM osapi_compute_listen=[::1] doesn't seem to work
17:19:44 mriedem EmilienM: not sure off hand
17:19:50 mriedem sdague or sc68cal might know
17:19:58 EmilienM I'll try with ::1
17:20:30 EmilienM mriedem: triple jobs have ipv6 coverage, fyi
17:21:42 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Update the upgrades part of devref https://review.openstack.org/428824
17:21:43 EmilienM mriedem: btw, I saw your comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428424/ - and I think we should have the job asap since things are broken for us, it would be helpful on both sides to have the job in place without having to run "check experimental".
17:23:48 superdan mriedem: see my doc update for the upgrades.rst just now
17:24:02 superdan mriedem: I was explaining that process to someone recently and wanted to RTFM them to that doc
17:24:11 superdan mriedem: but then realized it needed some serious freshening
17:31:05 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: utils.get_disk return the target dev of the root device https://review.openstack.org/402716
17:31:06 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Make guest.BlockDevice only use the target dev of a disk https://review.openstack.org/402163
17:31:07 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Wait for abort_job to complete when not resizing https://review.openstack.org/382449
17:32:11 sc68cal mriedem: EmilienM: [::1]:<port>
17:32:11 johnthetubaguy superdan: I will take a peak at that upgrade doc, looks interesting
17:32:23 superdan johnthetubaguy: thanks
17:32:52 sc68cal mriedem: EmilienM: so I guess [::1]:8774 is what you're looking for
17:33:31 EmilienM sc68cal: yeah? we had osapi_compute_listen=host until now
17:33:47 EmilienM and osapi_compute_listen_port for the port
17:35:33 sc68cal ok, then osapi_compute_listen=::1 should work
17:35:41 EmilienM sc68cal: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova/tree/nova/conf/service.py#n96
17:35:46 EmilienM sc68cal: ok I'm trying it, thanks
17:35:58 EmilienM sc68cal: FYI we add brackets because some other services need it
17:36:00 sc68cal hang on let me poke it with netcat
17:36:07 EmilienM and the best practise in IPv6 is to have brackets
17:36:22 EmilienM tbh, I think having [::1] rather than ::1 is much safer
17:36:31 sc68cal oh yes much safer
17:42:47 sc68cal some services want brackets, others don't
17:44:56 sc68cal are we passing the correct options to eventlet.listen? there's an optional kwarg for address family
17:45:10 sc68cal it might be defaulting to v4 and trying to resolve ::1 as a dns name
17:45:40 johnthetubaguy superdan: I thought SIG_HUP was enough after the initial restart?
17:46:07 johnthetubaguy superdan: oh, missread, I see your point now
17:47:17 superdan johnthetubaguy: not for static configs, yeah
17:47:37 superdan that subtle detail could have been pretty annoying for someone :)
17:48:05 johnthetubaguy yeah, totally
17:51:49 superdan johnthetubaguy: I was tempted to put "read the effing release notes" as a formal step in there :)
17:52:29 johnthetubaguy superdan: step 2, no really, read them.
17:53:10 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Add check for invalid inventory amounts https://review.openstack.org/428800
17:53:23 superdan johnthetubaguy: heh, right
17:53:24 figleaf cdent: ^^ Fixed
17:54:09 cdent figleaf: ossum
17:54:47 openstackgerrit Anusha Unnam proposed openstack/nova master: Reno for additional-notification-fields-for-searchlight https://review.openstack.org/428835
18:00:34 sc68cal EmilienM: so looks like we had a netsplit
18:00:43 sc68cal EmilienM: where did I lose you
18:01:17 EmilienM sc68cal: better: http://logs.openstack.org/86/428786/3/check/gate-puppet-openstack-integration-4-scenario001-tempest-centos-7/d244aec/logs/nova/nova-api.txt.gz#_2017-02-03_17_44_34_097
18:01:35 EmilienM sc68cal: so using ::1 works :-/
18:02:39 sc68cal EmilienM: yep..... we have same issue with mysql vs alembic/sqlchemy
18:02:45 aunnam gibi, if possible can you review this patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428835/
18:03:23 sc68cal EmilienM: https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/blob/master/lib/database#L77
18:05:29 openstackgerrit Bob Ball proposed openstack/nova master: Fix live migrate with XenServer https://review.openstack.org/424428
18:05:31 BobBall johnthetubaguy: ^^ Hopefully that'll fix the different network concern
18:09:43 cdent mriedem, johnthetubaguy: the tagging has not happened has it?
18:10:04 cdent writing up some notes and wanted to know if https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428375/ was part of the now-ish release
18:11:07 johnthetubaguy https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428531/ says we haven't tagged yet, looks like we can include the ironic one if we wish
18:26:03 mriedem cdent: not yet
18:26:25 mriedem but now that https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428375/ is merged and i'm back from lunch, i'm going to rev the rc1 tag patch
18:27:35 cdent mriedem: how very exciting
18:31:05 mriedem i know, i'm cutting glass over here
18:33:02 superdan lol
18:33:03 openstackgerrit Sujitha proposed openstack/nova master: Reno for additional-notification-fields-for-searchlight https://review.openstack.org/428835
18:34:33 johnthetubaguy mriedem: I am guessing there is no way to backport this one, if it misses RC1 right? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/424428
18:35:44 mriedem johnthetubaguy: not with the object version change,
18:35:46 mriedem but there is rc2
18:35:56 johnthetubaguy mriedem: what if we just get the object change in?
18:36:04 mriedem heh, so i thought about that yesterday
18:36:13 johnthetubaguy mriedem: but rc2 is a backport I guess
18:36:22 mriedem yes rc2 is a backport to stable/ocata technically
18:36:35 mriedem but it'd also be pre-release
18:36:36 superdan johnthetubaguy: mriedem it's okay if the versions have no gap, and I think this is sufficiently defensive
18:36:47 superdan I mean, it's technically okay if there's no gap
18:37:20 johnthetubaguy superdan: oh, true, the likely hood of moving from stable to a commit without that commit seems fairly tiny
18:37:46 superdan johnthetubaguy: the biggestdeal is if you happen to get conductor on rc1 and compute on rc2
18:37:50 superdan however,
18:38:03 superdan I think rcN is really to make sure that rc1 was what we wanted
18:38:08 superdan mechanically it's a backport,
18:38:17 superdan but I can't really think the semantics can be considered the same
18:38:31 johnthetubaguy yeah, thats fair
18:39:14 mriedem so..are we saying we can backport the whole thing for rc2, or do we hold up rc1 for just the object version change and then backport the rest?
18:39:20 johnthetubaguy not hit an object change in an RC potential bug before, I guess it must have happened
18:39:25 johnthetubaguy mriedem: the first one I think
18:39:31 mriedem superdan: you agree? ^
18:39:50 superdan mriedem: yeah, all in rc2
18:40:08 johnthetubaguy its a driver specific object anyways, so the risk is lower I guess
18:40:25 superdan this is the thing that is not a regression in ocata though right?
18:40:47 johnthetubaguy it might have been newton, not sure actually
18:41:58 EmilienM mriedem: can you revisit https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428424/ please?
18:42:40 mriedem johnthetubaguy: superdan: BobBall said it was a regression in newton
18:42:48 superdan yeah, thought so
18:47:17 EmilienM mriedem: wow so https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428415/ passed for us?
18:48:01 EmilienM mriedem: but fail on our baremetal jobs: http://logs.openstack.org/15/428415/1/experimental-tripleo/gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-nonha/92a342e/console.html#_2017-02-03_01_43_02_872309
18:48:13 mriedem and fails a ton of tests in nova
18:48:19 mriedem and we don't really know what else would break with it

Earlier   Later