| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-04-05 | |||
| 15:14:09 | mriedem | how would it be hundreds when the default max limit on instances is 20? | |
| 15:14:19 | melwitt | hundreds of compute nodes | |
| 15:14:21 | melwitt | is common | |
| 15:14:34 | mriedem | yeah but aren't you asking for allocations for a given project? | |
| 15:14:36 | melwitt | and allocations are per resource provider | |
| 15:14:50 | cdent | mriedem: you make an excellent point | |
| 15:15:02 | mriedem | but my project by default can only allocate up to 20 instances right? | |
| 15:15:13 | mriedem | b/c allocations.consumer_id == instance.uuid | |
| 15:15:17 | melwitt | oh, hm | |
| 15:15:52 | jaypipes | there will still be 3x that number of records in the normal case (a record per instance for VCPU, MEMORY_MB, and DISK_GB of course) | |
| 15:16:28 | jaypipes | but anyway, like I said, it's nothing more than an ease-of-use thing (doing the top-level /usages endpoint) for me. | |
| 15:16:59 | mriedem | my point is i don't like 2 ways to skin the cat | |
| 15:17:15 | jaypipes | mriedem: one is a summary view, the other is a details view, that's all this is. | |
| 15:17:16 | mriedem | if /usages is the thing that's better and keeps the math on the server side, then that seems fine | |
| 15:17:31 | mriedem | i don't want to provide 2 apis when one is needed | |
| 15:17:38 | jaypipes | mriedem: we already have the /allocations endpoint, though. which is what cdent is saying. | |
| 15:17:39 | mriedem | so let's pick the one correct api | |
| 15:17:43 | melwitt | yeah, I was kinda thinking why not just do /usages only then | |
| 15:17:59 | mriedem | has anyone looked at the turd sandwich that is the compute api lately? :) | |
| 15:18:02 | mriedem | let's not do that again | |
| 15:18:27 | jaypipes | mriedem: Matt, nobody here is recommending making placement API into a turd sandwich. | |
| 15:18:34 | mriedem | jaypipes: so rather than change /allocations to take query params, we add /usages if that's better | |
| 15:18:45 | cdent | we do not have just /allocations yet, we have /allocations/{consumer_uuid}, burt limiting the numbers of paths seems nice | |
| 15:18:48 | jaypipes | mriedem: both the detail view (/allocations) and the summary view (/usages) are useful. | |
| 15:18:57 | jaypipes | cdent: good point. | |
| 15:19:04 | mriedem | jaypipes: they are not useful if we aren't using them both | |
| 15:19:09 | mriedem | one will be technical debt | |
| 15:19:34 | mriedem | so what is the one true best api that we can provide for melwitt's quota counting client side code? | |
| 15:19:36 | mriedem | and let's do that | |
| 15:19:55 | jaypipes | mriedem: my guess is that as soon as we add a summary view, someone will say "but what allocations are underneath that summary view?" | |
| 15:19:59 | jaypipes | mriedem: but meh. | |
| 15:20:10 | cdent | jaypipes: exactly my point | |
| 15:20:12 | mriedem | if someone has a valid use case later, then we add a new thing | |
| 15:20:23 | melwitt | I am still not clear on what the difference between a usage object and a allocation object is either | |
| 15:20:24 | cdent | people will want the details, and we have code that creates most of those details already | |
| 15:20:35 | jaypipes | mriedem: for the quota-counting use case, I believe GET /usages?project_id=X&user_id=Y is the best fit. | |
| 15:20:48 | mriedem | melwitt: idk either | |
| 15:20:54 | mriedem | because it wasn't modeled in the spec as it came up later | |
| 15:21:04 | mriedem | jaypipes: did you think /usages already existed when you commented on that in the spec? | |
| 15:21:28 | jaypipes | melwitt: a usage object is an aggregate view (total number of VCPU used, instead of X number of allocation records each with a VCPU record) | |
| 15:21:37 | mriedem | oh i see /resource_providers/{uuid}/usages | |
| 15:21:51 | melwitt | I'm not seeing any example of one in a response in the gabbits | |
| 15:22:30 | mriedem | melwitt: it's in the allocations gabbits | |
| 15:22:31 | mriedem | for /resource_providers/{uuid}/usages | |
| 15:22:40 | melwitt | ah, thanks | |
| 15:23:23 | mriedem | and usage.yaml | |
| 15:24:41 | melwitt | in usage.yaml all the responses are empty, I think. I was just looking to get an idea what the existing usages response looks like | |
| 15:25:04 | melwitt | but it's been explained, aggregate view, and that would be ideal for the quota checks | |
| 15:26:48 | mriedem | {'resource_provider_generation': 1, 'usages': {'VCPU': 2, 'MEMORY_MB': 2048, 'DISK_GB': 80}} | |
| 15:26:52 | mriedem | something like that i think | |
| 15:27:40 | melwitt | gotcha, thanks | |
| 15:27:43 | cdent | mriedem, melwitt line 353 in this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/370204/2/nova/tests/functional/api/openstack/placement/gabbits/fullrep.yaml | |
| 15:27:59 | cdent | and 441 | |
| 15:28:58 | melwitt | perfect, thanks | |
| 15:37:03 | dansmith | successful devstack multi-cell run: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/436094 | |
| 15:58:20 | openstackgerrit | Huan Xie proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: use os-xenapi V2 https://review.openstack.org/453493 | |
| 16:03:03 | sfinucan | mriedem: Quick question on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/433603/ | |
| 16:04:03 | sfinucan | I've the Sphinx integration for cliff done, but it'll be a while before it merges and a suitable version makes it's way into g-r | |
| 16:04:45 | sfinucan | I also need to drop a load of commands from nova-manage that are no longer necessary, but I figure we need a cycle of deprecation before doing so | |
| 16:05:23 | sfinucan | How do I track that from a spec/bp perspective? specless bp for this cycle (to deprecate commands) and a specful one for Queens to do the rewrite? | |
| 16:06:44 | mriedem | sfinucan: we don't need a bp to deprecate commands | |
| 16:07:16 | sfinucan | No? Sweet. I'll re-target that for Queens so | |
| 16:09:32 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova-specs master: A spec for idempotent custom resource classe creation https://review.openstack.org/453732 | |
| 16:09:38 | cdent | mriedem, jaypipes, edleafe ^ | |
| 16:09:49 | cdent | feh, typo right at the start mehness | |
| 16:09:58 | jaypipes | cdent: cool, thanks! | |
| 16:10:23 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova-specs master: A spec for idempotent custom resource class creation https://review.openstack.org/453732 | |
| 16:10:35 | edleafe | cdent: added | |
| 16:16:23 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.volume_detach notification https://review.openstack.org/408676 | |
| 16:21:36 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add 'move-nova-cmds-to-cliff' spec https://review.openstack.org/433603 | |
| 16:21:36 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Create specs directory for Queens https://review.openstack.org/453737 | |
| 16:21:50 | mriedem | dane-fichter: i'm completely confused by how we don't end up with an empty tuple for registered types here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/351232/16/nova/objects/fields.py | |
| 16:23:47 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.volume_attach notification https://review.openstack.org/401992 | |
| 16:23:49 | openstackgerrit | Sujitha proposed openstack/nova master: Add sync_instances action in os-cells API https://review.openstack.org/453366 | |
| 16:26:25 | efried | mriedem The register method can stuff things into the class member REGISTERED_TYPES. | |
| 16:26:56 | efried | mriedem https://pastebin.com/aECAcEFK | |
| 16:28:23 | mriedem | is register a special method in python? | |
| 16:28:49 | efried | Not that I know of. Does it need to be? | |
| 16:29:07 | efried | It's defined on the SignatureKeyType class. | |
| 16:29:56 | mriedem | yeah, but without calling SignatureKeyType.register, which the nova code doesn't do, how does REGISTERED_TYPES get populated? | |
| 16:30:28 | efried | mriedem Well, okay, I wasn't assuming we knew for sure that register never got called anywhere... | |
| 16:32:41 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova-specs master: A spec for idempotent custom resource class creation https://review.openstack.org/453732 | |
| 16:34:01 | mriedem | it seems to work, i just don't know how | |
| 16:34:52 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.volume_detach notification https://review.openstack.org/408676 | |
| 16:35:13 | mriedem | efried: dane-fichter: ah import time fun https://github.com/openstack/cursive/blob/0.1.2/cursive/signature_utils.py#L172-L180 | |
| 16:35:47 | efried | I was gonna say, "must get called from within cursive somewhere". But I would have been grasping at straws ;-) | |
| 16:42:22 | openstackgerrit | Anusha Unnam proposed openstack/nova master: Add description to policies in security_group_default_rules.py https://review.openstack.org/453748 | |
| 16:49:05 | johnthetubaguy | aunnam sneti this is the keystone spec I was raising about the additional roles spec: https://review.openstack.org/453739 | |
| 16:50:32 | aunnam | johnthetubaguy thanks, will review it | |
| 16:50:35 | sneti | johnthetubaguy, will check that.. | |
| 16:56:30 | openstackgerrit | Sujitha proposed openstack/nova master: Add sync_instances action in os-cells API https://review.openstack.org/453366 | |
| 17:06:32 | openstackgerrit | Bob Ball proposed openstack/nova master: Use physical utilisation for cached images https://review.openstack.org/353862 | |
| 17:07:27 | mriedem | melwitt: so just for closure, were you going to amend the placement usages spec to use a new /usages handler rather than /allocations? | |
| 17:07:50 | melwitt | mriedem: yes. will do that today | |
| 17:07:56 | mriedem | ok cool | |
| 17:08:01 | mriedem | i got confused by all of the options | |
| 17:08:13 | mriedem | plus, someone jangled some keys in front of me | |
| 17:09:10 | mriedem | sdague: well with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/447728/ merged i think we're ready for novaclient 8.0.0 which drops all of the proxy crap | |
| 17:09:11 | melwitt | heh, yeah. I've had a lot of meetings this morning so I didn't get to it yet | |
| 17:32:21 | dane-fichter | mriedem: sorry I had to step out for a meeting | |