| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-03-06 | |||
| 21:26:43 | jgriffith | mriedem flavor :). Just ignore that | |
| 21:27:12 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: They don't have sufficient expertise to start new thing at the moment but to help support ours - it's possible. | |
| 21:28:50 | mriedem | but again, you no longer work for EMC and while it's nice you say you'd support it anyway, i don't see that happening in 6 months just from a purely motivational aspect, which is why i'd think that if EMC cares about this they'd have people backfilling your team to support this | |
| 21:29:06 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine wait... you're saying Xing's team doesn't have the expertise? I'd argue strongly against that statement | |
| 21:29:18 | alexandrelevine | jgriffith: By the way - this code is quite static, by the way :) Any attempts in refactoring have failed as I understand. | |
| 21:29:39 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: They do. | |
| 21:30:23 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine here's the thing... I want this feature as per customer requests for SolidFire | |
| 21:30:24 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: They care about this direction. But I said that we'll finish because any new guys would take time to get into the code and the nova procedures and processes so again 2-3 more releases at the best. | |
| 21:30:54 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine so if you go this route, then that means I go this route... then Pure does the same, then <insert-1-of-100-cinder-backends-here> go this route | |
| 21:30:56 | jgriffith | that's stupid | |
| 21:31:17 | jgriffith | Sure, it'd be easier for me to do it this way too, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea | |
| 21:31:19 | alexandrelevine | jgriffith: You can call it stupid, but that's reality. | |
| 21:31:41 | alexandrelevine | jgriffith: I wouldn't recommend to go the same way again now that everybody is pro universal backend. | |
| 21:31:43 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine wait.. to be clear, I'm saying if we had 100 backends image drivers in Nova that would be stupid | |
| 21:31:47 | jgriffith | not what you're doing is stupid | |
| 21:32:09 | alexandrelevine | jgriffith: I'd suggested to start with it. It's about the same amount of work. No need to create SolidFire specific piece. | |
| 21:32:21 | jgriffith | LOL | |
| 21:32:32 | alexandrelevine | :) | |
| 21:32:34 | jgriffith | so it's no good for you, but good for everyone else :) | |
| 21:32:38 | mriedem | to be clear, i'm not going to support 100 cinder drivers in nova | |
| 21:32:47 | jgriffith | mriedem no? Damn! | |
| 21:32:51 | mriedem | which is why we want to stop doing this | |
| 21:32:56 | jgriffith | mriedem +1 | |
| 21:33:06 | jgriffith | mriedem and that's why I never even bothered trying to go down that path | |
| 21:33:09 | mriedem | because i'm sure veritas is wanting the same thing | |
| 21:33:23 | mriedem | veritas has been pushing specs for the same stuff | |
| 21:33:34 | alexandrelevine | Guys I totally agree with stopping doing it. I'm just saying that if you stop BEFORE Scaleio is in it means that it'll be out for 2-3 more releases. | |
| 21:34:16 | alexandrelevine | I tell you what. We can even consider doing or helping doing the cinder driver in nova. | |
| 21:34:31 | alexandrelevine | Because it's interesting and we're quite into it. | |
| 21:35:10 | alexandrelevine | But not as a replacement for now-ready ScaleIO. In more relaxed schedule and if Randy approves because we still work with him. | |
| 21:35:24 | jgriffith | Randy? | |
| 21:35:29 | alexandrelevine | Randy Bias. | |
| 21:35:57 | alexandrelevine | Basically almost all of our efforts in OpenStack are his ideas. | |
| 21:36:03 | dansmith | lol | |
| 21:36:27 | alexandrelevine | He might approve by the way if he sees that it's really needed. | |
| 21:38:05 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine ok, so look from my perspective; it's the wrong direction. | |
| 21:38:21 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine I feel for ya in terms of investment etc but my vote is generalized solution | |
| 21:38:28 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine I'm sorry about that | |
| 21:38:54 | mriedem | alexandrelevine: jgriffith: i was mostly looking for input on the specific issues that are going to delay the cinder backend, | |
| 21:38:59 | alexandrelevine | jgriffith: generalized solution with "no" for the specific one for now? | |
| 21:39:03 | mriedem | alexandrelevine: i'm not asking your team to write that code, | |
| 21:39:04 | jgriffith | but it's the right thing to do in terms of the overall project and it's the "fair" thing to do in terms of vendors and MOST OF ALL it's the right thing to do in terms of cloud deployers | |
| 21:39:21 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine correct, no specific drivers | |
| 21:39:23 | mriedem | but we obviously need to start with a spec and detailing the issues that are going to be hit with this will help give a better idea of how long and risky that's going to be | |
| 21:39:53 | jgriffith | alexandrelevine I sincerely would hope you and your team would help in the effort given you have vast experience and interest | |
| 21:40:02 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: You did that with imagebackend refactoring. Did it help you to predict 1.5 years and failure in the end? | |
| 21:40:18 | jgriffith | but if you can't/don't then that's ok too; doesn't change my opinion | |
| 21:40:49 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: What if you spend 2 months on the spec and find it risky and difficult or just difficult and taking 2-3 more releases? | |
| 21:40:52 | mriedem | i don't have enough info to make a judgement call on whether or not we should take on the technical debt for the backend that may or may not be supported, unless i have a better understanding of how hard it's going to be to get the cinder driver done | |
| 21:42:00 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: What I'm saying is that the question is - when did you get clear and correct specs of that complexity in this area? I'm again referring to the refactoring spec/specs. | |
| 21:42:20 | alexandrelevine | Ours is good because we have the code which works for 1.5 year already. | |
| 21:42:55 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: Who'll right such a spec? Who has a thorough enough expertise? | |
| 21:43:00 | mriedem | alexandrelevine: the imagebackend refactor failed for different reasons | |
| 21:43:13 | alexandrelevine | "write" | |
| 21:44:26 | alexandrelevine | I just want to remind that in order to provide my design ideas for refactoring I had to develop the whole solution and make it pass all of the existing tests. Then I was sure that my ideas would work and I was ready to write a spec. | |
| 21:49:59 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: Please let me know when the conversation is finished and you made up your mind with some verdict because it's 0:49 am here and unless we keep talking I can go and get some sleep. | |
| 21:51:28 | mriedem | alexandrelevine: i think i'm done right now. i'm not ready to add the scaleio specific driver without having a better idea of how the generic driver would happen (or not happen). | |
| 21:52:41 | alexandrelevine | mriedem: Ok, thank you. Do we abandon our spec or just leave it be? | |
| 21:52:56 | mriedem | alexandrelevine: i'd leave it for now | |
| 21:53:12 | alexandrelevine | Ok. Bye. | |
| 22:29:16 | mriedem | jgriffith: dumped my recap notes on the talk with alex in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304715/ | |
| 22:41:44 | mriedem | dansmith: i moved your nova meeting stuff on the forum planning into the reminders section since it's something that will probably continue to come up as we get closer | |
| 22:41:51 | mriedem | like for the ptg planning | |
| 22:41:52 | dansmith | mriedem: cool | |
| 22:51:45 | ildikov | mriedem: hi, are you around for a quick question? | |
| 22:52:34 | mriedem | ildikov: i am | |
| 22:52:42 | ildikov | mriedem: tnx | |
| 22:52:52 | ildikov | mriedem: so I always confuse myself with the release notes | |
| 22:53:12 | ildikov | mriedem: I'm cleaning up the patch to move Nova to Cinder v3, the base 3.0 | |
| 22:53:37 | ildikov | mriedem: and was wondering whether it's 'other' or 'upgrade' category? | |
| 22:54:22 | mriedem | ildikov: depends on the change | |
| 22:54:29 | ildikov | mriedem: and how much we want to go into if anyone wants v2 as they might have a that old Cinder but they love it they can modify the 'catalog_info' in the config? | |
| 22:54:31 | mriedem | supporting cinder v3 would probably be a feature | |
| 22:54:42 | mriedem | are you also changing the default? | |
| 22:55:17 | mriedem | changing the default on a config option means a reno in the upgrade section | |
| 22:55:29 | ildikov | mriedem: if changing the default equals to set the catalog_info to v3, then I'm changing the default | |
| 22:55:36 | mriedem | yeah | |
| 22:55:40 | mriedem | so upgrade section | |
| 22:56:08 | ildikov | mriedem: as we agreed to change the default in case I need to do more than that please point me to that too :) | |
| 22:57:08 | ildikov | mriedem: cool, I will add an upgrade section then, just wanted to be sure | |
| 22:57:12 | ildikov | mriedem: tnx! | |
| 22:57:24 | mriedem | yw | |
| 23:09:49 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Get instance availability_zone without hitting the api db https://review.openstack.org/439754 | |
| 23:09:50 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Teach HostAPI about cells https://review.openstack.org/442162 | |
| 23:09:50 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make os-availability-zones know about cells https://review.openstack.org/442163 | |
| 23:09:51 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Change MQ targeting to honor only what is in the context https://review.openstack.org/438023 | |
| 23:09:51 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Make scheduler target cells to get compute node instance info https://review.openstack.org/439891 | |
| 23:09:52 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add cell field to Destination object https://review.openstack.org/438024 | |
| 23:09:52 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Make conductor ask scheduler to limit migrates to same cell https://review.openstack.org/438025 | |
| 23:09:53 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Teach os-aggregates about cells https://review.openstack.org/442200 | |
| 23:14:54 | tonygunk | Wondering if someone can point me in the right direction in error I'm getting with Ocata and Xen Hypervisor | |
| 23:15:07 | tonygunk | http://paste.openstack.org/raw/601670/ | |
| 23:15:58 | tonygunk | Getting the following: TypeError: Argument must be bytes or unicode, got 'NoneType' | |
| 23:17:12 | tonygunk | All other hypervisors are running KVM and no issues of course - just trying Xen on one node | |
| 23:22:49 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova-specs master: DELETE all inventories for a resource provider https://review.openstack.org/415885 | |
| 23:23:39 | mriedem | tonygunk: libvirt + xen or xenapi? | |
| 23:23:46 | mriedem | because this looks like it's hitting libvirt code | |
| 23:23:59 | tonygunk | libvirt + xen | |
| 23:24:06 | mriedem | anthonyper: ^ | |
| 23:24:54 | mriedem | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/15.0.0/nova/virt/libvirt/config.py#L1665 | |