Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-03-17
15:01:34 mriedem i guess?
15:01:37 mriedem idk man, just pull it down
15:01:53 mriedem i'm enjoying my -1 stat padding though
15:01:59 sdague heh
15:02:15 sdague this is one of those areas where github is *so* much better than gerrit
15:03:32 jgriffith mriedem johnthetubaguy hey... just want to check with the two of you. For the client.get_highest_microversion call; would you prefer that we ONLY call that when a call for a method that requires/wants the version info is requested?
15:04:26 jgriffith johnthetubaguy I think that might be the point you were trying to make in the review comments, so rather than ALWAYS do it on init, provide an explicit method to query that info, and then also use that mechanism when calling things like the new attach/detach methods
15:04:30 openstackgerrit Sean Dague proposed openstack/nova master: Improve descriptions for hostId, host, and hypervisor_hostname https://review.openstack.org/446761
15:05:35 leakypipes mhenkel: yup!
15:05:53 johnthetubaguy jgriffith: so if you get your detach patch, and try use the logic, I think that will clear things up. That needs 3.27 or it fails with "the world is upside down" error. Only attach needs the explcit call to check if 3.27 is supported and chose the old or new path.
15:06:00 melwitt that api-ref wording is a hot topic I see!
15:06:13 mriedem +2
15:06:14 mriedem finally
15:06:19 mriedem welcome new contributor
15:06:29 johnthetubaguy melwitt: looking at what dansmith has done to your quota patches, I guess you are working through that?
15:06:31 jgriffith johnthetubaguy ok
15:06:35 jgriffith johnthetubaguy thanks
15:07:00 dansmith johnthetubaguy: yes, I made a mess, but I knew it was going to be
15:07:03 melwitt johnthetubaguy: yes, sorry about that. I'm going to finish fixing those up today. we split them into smaller chunks for easier review
15:07:25 dansmith melwitt: I can help if you want, but probably not very parallelizeable work
15:07:38 melwitt johnthetubaguy: on the one you reviewed today, that "destroy all by project" is just a plain destroy. that patch is just making Quotas object read/write to API DB
15:08:26 melwitt dansmith: nah, it's okay, I have got it
15:09:14 melwitt johnthetubaguy: I think what you were thinking of was an older version of the quota counting patch where I was using a destroy with limit/offset for addressing races
15:09:18 melwitt I took that out
15:12:43 openstackgerrit Silvan Kaiser proposed openstack/nova master: Removes getfattr from Quobyte Nova driver https://review.openstack.org/428646
15:13:05 melwitt johnthetubaguy: nevermind my earlier statement. I think I don't understand what you mean by "Its the delete something and the sync logic brings it back to life problem."
15:14:48 melwitt everybody was +2 on this patch PS8. all I did was update a few code comments based on leakypipes feedback
15:15:48 leakypipes melwitt: the Quota object patch you mean?
15:16:14 melwitt leakypipes: yeah, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/410945/
15:16:23 edleafe kashyap: mdbooth: Sorry, wasn't able to grab the logs from the client machine - it's behind several layers of firewalls, so I'll need someone from their location to send them to me
15:16:26 edmondsw mriedem fyi just marked https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1656056 as a dup of https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1657774 where the fix is already proposed
15:16:26 openstack Launchpad bug 1657774 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "duplicate for #1656056 Nova does not re-raise 401 Unauthorized received from Neutron for admin users" [Undecided,Confirmed] - Assigned to Roman Podoliaka (rpodolyaka)
15:16:27 openstack Launchpad bug 1657774 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Nova does not re-raise 401 Unauthorized received from Neutron for admin users" [Undecided,Confirmed] - Assigned to Roman Podoliaka (rpodolyaka)
15:16:38 edleafe They're in Japan, so it won't be until Monday
15:16:51 edmondsw mriedem you had marked the original high, so you probably want to do the same on the other now that the original is a dup
15:17:01 edmondsw fix proposed lgtm
15:17:26 melwitt leakypipes: I think I addressed all your comments, the one you wanted most was the single db transaction thing and I posted a comment that when I tried that, I got a "transaction already started" because I think the decorator already starts and maintains a transaction?
15:17:30 kashyap edleafe: No worries. When you have it, can take a look. But please don't forget to enable the log filters I noted in the scrollback
15:18:06 leakypipes melwitt: right, I think I had re-commented "ok, yes, makes sense" on that (or similar) :)
15:18:21 melwitt leakypipes: oh, hm, lemme check again
15:18:32 edmondsw mriedem_afk ^ I was tagging mriedem...
15:19:29 melwitt leakypipes: you didn't reply on that, the last reply I see from you was about the lack of a parent-child relationship of the tables
15:19:51 leakypipes doh, melwitt it was a draft comment never submitted... fuug
15:20:55 edleafe kashyap: yes, I checked, and they were exactly as you said
15:21:02 edleafe oops, my manners
15:22:54 melwitt leakypipes: a-ha!
15:25:40 johnthetubaguy melwitt: yeah, I was trying to remember what I mean in there too
15:25:52 melwitt heh :)
15:26:35 johnthetubaguy melwitt: I think it was fine before, just trying to remember what I was worried before
15:42:17 openstackgerrit Thomas Stewart proposed openstack/nova master: Add lan9118 as valid nic for hw_vif_model property for qemu https://review.openstack.org/393489
15:45:32 jsheeren hi all
15:46:25 jsheeren i'm seeing this in my nova-compute log since today: INFO oslo.messaging._drivers.impl_rabbit [-] A recoverable connection/channel error occurred, trying to reconnect: Socket close
15:46:48 jsheeren the nova-compute service get's marked down by the controllers for a minute or two, then it recovers
15:46:56 jsheeren has anyone seen this behaviour before,
15:46:57 jsheeren ?
15:48:20 leakypipes mhenkel: looks like you still need to address those unit test failures, though. let us know if you need assistance.
15:50:48 sneti johnthetubaguy, I've updated the base patch for policy. can you please check this: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/434842/
15:52:54 mriedem superdan: some easy test fixups in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/447009/
15:53:07 efried mriedem (aka Swamp Thing) your influence has spread: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/445667/2/nova_powervm/tests/virt/powervm/volume/test_iscsi.py@53
15:53:13 mriedem superdan: our next release of novaclient is going to be a major version bump, so we'll want to backport that bug fix to stable/ocata
15:54:06 mriedem efried: cool
15:54:33 mriedem superdan: but then after the bug fix i think we should just remove those deprecated arguments
15:54:50 efried mriedem BTW, yesterday I looked through nova-powervm to see what it would take to retrofit the whole project accordingly. Yeeeaaaahhh, prolly not gonna do that wholesale any time soon.
15:55:12 mriedem retrofit for what? autospec?
15:55:15 efried yeah.
15:55:27 efried But at least we can implement it moving forward.
15:55:40 efried And the in-tree driver will be clean.
15:55:56 mriedem warning on autospec, claudiub has experience with that https://review.openstack.org/#/c/339232/
15:56:01 mriedem it does take a performance hit on the test run
15:56:19 superdan mriedem: I guess I missed the point at which we started having stable branches for clients
15:56:25 mriedem superdan: years ago
15:56:48 mriedem so we could backport the fix to ocata and release 7.1.1
15:56:52 efried That's interesting - the docs on autospec claim it's lazy out of the box.
15:56:59 superdan mriedem: regardless of when, I guess I missed it
15:57:02 mriedem so your customer can pick that up w/o the backward incompatible changes that will be in 8.0.0 in pike
15:57:45 mriedem we needed stable branches on all of the clients and libraries just to get fixes back, plus we needed it at times to unscrew the gate back before upper-constraints
15:59:16 claudiub ooh, autospec
15:59:20 claudiub i'm actually working on it
15:59:29 claudiub I want it to become a permanent thingy
16:00:05 claudiub mriedem: something like this should do the trick: https://github.com/testing-cabal/mock/pull/394
16:00:33 claudiub there's still an issue with mock.patch autospecing, on which i'm working on.
16:00:53 mriedem cool
16:01:38 efried claudiub Second sentence here claims it's already lazy: https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.mock.html#autospeccing
16:02:02 efried claudiub So you've discovered that's a false claim under certain conditions?
16:02:21 claudiub it is a false claim. :)
16:02:42 claudiub efried: https://github.com/testing-cabal/mock/issues/393
16:02:45 efried claudiub Down a page or so, more explicitly: "Because the speccing is done “lazily” (the spec is created as attributes on the mock are accessed) you can use it with very complex or deeply nested objects (like modules that import modules that import modules) without a big performance hit."
16:02:55 efried Imagine my disappointment.
16:03:12 claudiub i know, right? :)
16:04:04 claudiub anyways, the only thing that specing / autospecing does at the moment, is ensure that your mock only have the same attributes / members as the spec itself, raising an AttributeError if non-existent attributes are accesed.
16:04:11 claudiub so, there's at least that.
16:04:19 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: compute: Move detach logic from manager into driver BDM https://review.openstack.org/439520
16:04:19 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: compute: Only destroy BDMs after successful detach call https://review.openstack.org/440693
16:04:32 efried claudiub That issue doesn't look related to performance/laziness
16:04:33 lyarwood mdbooth: ^ remove_volume_connection behaviour should remain the same now
16:05:05 melwitt claudiub, efried: well, it's expensive when you go and autospec every possible attribute, which is what you're doing right?
16:05:07 claudiub efried: but, you can give my PR i've linked above a try. it fixes this issue. check the added unit tests. There are still some unit tests failing for pypy, because the unittests themselves are faulty.
16:05:13 mdbooth lyarwood: Thanks, will look.
16:05:50 claudiub melwitt: actually, the way mock works, is create a child mock when a mock's attrbute is accessed, and it wasn't accessed before, and then caches it.
16:06:25 claudiub so, what I've done, is ensure that that child mock is properly spec'ed when created.

Earlier   Later