Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-04-04
21:49:21 mriedem you have to put all of the hosts into aggregates,
21:49:32 mriedem one for scaleio-specific, and one for non-scaleio specific,
21:49:45 mriedem and then all of your flavors have to have extra specs that tie them to either of the aggregates
21:50:02 mriedem that seems like the only way around it
22:03:19 mriedem melwitt: jaypipes: dansmith: i'm +2 on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453030/ - the rest api impact section could call out the need for a microversion bump, but that could be done in a follow up, or just implied
22:04:01 dansmith I haven't had a chance to look at it yet
22:09:07 edleafe charge/.charge/.
22:09:16 edleafe stupid vm windows
22:17:36 openstackgerrit Sarafraj Singh proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec to add per instance timeout for LM https://review.openstack.org/442809
22:19:56 melwitt mriedem: yeah, agreed. the only other thing I thought of is if we added a near copy of the AggregateInstanceExtraSpecsFilter that _doesn't_ do the empty extra_specs pass thing and operators would have to choose either/or, depending on the behavior desired
22:22:58 mriedem dansmith: i could use some input on this remove bdm device from api spec too, since it's getting caught up in some legacy kerfuffle https://review.openstack.org/#/c/452546/
22:23:16 mriedem net is bfv with image bdm overrides f'cks it all up
22:23:38 mriedem but, we could remove device from volume attach api i think since that doesn't have the image bdm over bfv mess
22:23:48 dansmith oh I thought this was the one john had commented on,
22:24:01 dansmith but this is different
22:24:02 mriedem there was never a spec for this,
22:24:06 mriedem we've talked about it a billion times
22:24:19 mriedem and i thought someone was going to write a spec, but didn't, so i posted to the ML over the weekend and wrote a spec,
22:24:26 mriedem to which ftersin pointed out this legacy hack for ec2
22:25:26 dansmith yeah
22:25:43 mriedem artom: do you know if, off the top of your head, we snapshot a volume backed instance that has bdm tags, do the bdm tags also go into the block_device_mapping_v2 image metadata?
22:25:58 mriedem so that when you boot a new server from that snapshot image, it does bfv with a tagged bdm?
22:30:41 dansmith guh what a mess
22:31:03 mriedem heh yeah totally
22:31:49 dansmith so I was thinking what mdbooth said before I got down and saw his comment,
22:32:01 dansmith but your reply doesn't make sense to me
22:32:19 dansmith I think his point is to just leave device_name in the api, but make it clear in all the docs that it is in no way related to the block device name in the guest
22:32:33 dansmith meaning, change the docs and examples to something like "disk1" and such
22:34:22 mriedem i meant rather than correlate on device_name, we correlate on tag
22:35:01 mriedem we do actually set a device_name in the bdm based on what libvirt calculates it to be
22:35:28 dansmith we overwrite what the user gave us?
22:35:30 mriedem so i think having something in the api that says this volume is attached at /dev/vdb but it's actually not, is part of the problem, and why we wanted to remove it
22:35:36 mriedem dansmith: yes
22:35:43 mriedem the libvirt driver completely ignores what the user specified
22:35:45 mriedem since liberty
22:35:57 mriedem as noted in the spec
22:36:01 dansmith but libvirt doesn't know what it is in the guest
22:36:26 dansmith it knows that it thinks it will be vdb in the guest based on where it got attached, but the guest chooses that
22:36:45 mriedem then why do we even call https://review.openstack.org/#/c/189632/10/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py@6802 ?
22:37:09 mriedem i guess because we need to have *something* in the bdm table b/c it's used for a shitty primary key
22:37:20 dansmith to populate that field with something semi recognizeable, I guess
22:37:28 dansmith but it's definitely not the right thing even in that case
22:38:27 mriedem ok
22:38:33 mriedem so we could just throw a uuid in bdm.device_name
22:38:36 dansmith as you say we _could_ do away with all of this and use the tag for sure
22:38:36 mriedem and it wouldn't matter
22:38:42 dansmith right, we could
22:39:07 dansmith but the least amount of change would be to just be more ambiguous about what "device name" is I think
22:39:21 dansmith although we should ask a xenapi person,
22:39:27 dansmith as in xen it does actually match
22:39:32 dansmith or can, or did, or whatever
22:39:44 dansmith and libvirt with xen may try to make it match, I have no idea
22:40:07 mriedem the least amount of change will be for me to just abandon the spec :)
22:40:12 dansmith hah
22:40:51 mriedem if the only thing we care about is this dumb image bdm override use case, wouldn't it be incrementally better to at least remove device from the attach volume api?
22:40:59 mriedem or is that not even worth it?
22:41:37 dansmith it didn't seem clear to me that this wasn't also a problem for ec2 in that api,
22:41:42 dansmith but I have a hard time understanding his words
22:42:01 dansmith but yeah, if he doesn't care about that, it'd be worth doing I think
22:42:22 mriedem yeah i have a hard time following what the ec2api is doing or not
22:42:31 mriedem i do'nt know if it's merging the bdms before we hit the compute api or what
22:42:41 dansmith yeah I dunno
22:42:42 mriedem and i'll be god damned if i'm going to go code spelunking
22:51:12 mriedem artom: found the answer to my question, we don't include bdm tags in snapshots
22:51:32 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/block_device.py#L290
22:51:46 mriedem we'd have to add it to copy_from_template
22:52:39 mriedem would one expect a new server created from the image snapshot with the volume snapshot bdm to have the original bdm tag? i don't know. does anyone care? probably not.
23:06:41 openstackgerrit Sujitha proposed openstack/nova master: Add sync_instances action in os-cells API https://review.openstack.org/453366
23:28:03 artom mriedem, always happy to have things work out in my absence;)
23:37:25 openstackgerrit Sujitha proposed openstack/nova master: Add BDM to InstancePayload https://review.openstack.org/448779
#openstack-nova - 2017-04-05
00:11:05 openstackgerrit Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add empty flavor object info in server api-ref https://review.openstack.org/452078
00:11:46 gmann oomichi: fixed ^^
00:13:12 EmilienM mriedem: ok so Sem-Ver: api-break is good IIUC
00:15:07 oomichi gmann: thanks, +2
00:15:20 gmann oomichi: thanks
00:20:32 mriedem EmilienM: yeah i'm fine with that
00:20:47 mriedem if my understanding was correct (my comment in the patch)
00:21:32 EmilienM mriedem: cool, thanks!
00:21:43 EmilienM I need to figure if I can send the patch to all projects
00:21:47 EmilienM I already did nova & ironic so far
00:41:55 Sihan Hi, I want to continue working on the https://review.openstack.org/#/c/348317/, could someone help to restore the patch?
01:06:00 openstackgerrit Li Yingjun proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for service create and destroy notification https://review.openstack.org/444731
01:07:02 openstackgerrit Li Yingjun proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for service create and destroy notification https://review.openstack.org/444731
01:29:11 openstackgerrit Li Yingjun proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Re-propose compute-node-notification for Pike https://review.openstack.org/345714
01:33:57 openstackgerrit Li Yingjun proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for service create and destroy notification https://review.openstack.org/444731
02:15:22 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: make it clear that os-cells is for cells v1 https://review.openstack.org/453433
02:43:39 gmann mriedem: do you know why i cannot mark this as "Won't Fix" ? - https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bug/1504641
02:43:39 openstack Launchpad bug 1504641 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Listing volumes respects osapi_max_limit but does not provide a link to the next element" [Wishlist,New]
02:44:10 openstackgerrit Huan Xie proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Fix race condition when neutron is using minimized poll https://review.openstack.org/444230
02:52:46 openstackgerrit Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Add empty flavor object info in server api-ref https://review.openstack.org/452078
03:02:57 openstackgerrit Huan Xie proposed openstack/nova master: XenAPI: Create linux bridge in dest host during live migration https://review.openstack.org/451657
03:07:35 openstackgerrit Huan Xie proposed openstack/nova master: XenAPI: Don't use nicira-iface-id for XenServer VIF https://review.openstack.org/451641
04:17:03 openstackgerrit Zhang Hua proposed openstack/nova master: Try our best to bypass the dirty BDM to make nova more robust https://review.openstack.org/453451
04:42:36 openstackgerrit LIU Yulong proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Reset the instance keypair while rebuilding (spec) https://review.openstack.org/375221
04:43:37 MarkMielke Any Block Device Mapping experts online?
04:48:43 MarkMielke I'm having a bit of trouble understanding how to get the root_gb for bdm with destination_type = 'local', boot_index = 0. It doesn't seem to be recorded any more. volume_size is None.
04:49:22 MarkMielke I thought no worries - the flavor should work, right? Well, we have instances with local root, even though the flavor specifies root_gb = 0. Probably, it was changed at some point.
05:06:55 openstackgerrit Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove the usage of extension black/white list opt in user data https://review.openstack.org/450834
06:17:19 openstackgerrit Jianghua Wang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support VGPU https://review.openstack.org/450122
06:24:35 openstackgerrit Huan Xie proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: Fix race condition when neutron is using minimized poll https://review.openstack.org/444230

Earlier   Later