| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-04-12 | |||
| 14:36:27 | mriedem | i think the test just needs to define these credentials http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/tree/tempest/api/compute/base.py#n467 | |
| 14:36:40 | mriedem | i could help with the tempest test if you needed | |
| 14:37:09 | mriedem | or just do the test in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/tree/tempest/api/compute/admin/test_servers.py | |
| 14:37:43 | mriedem | the thing about tempest is it's branchless, so even if we fix the bug on master, the fix has to be backported to the stable branches for the tempest change to ever merge | |
| 14:38:01 | mriedem | unless we make that configurable in tempest | |
| 14:38:09 | mriedem | sorry this is probably a ton of information | |
| 14:39:17 | nkorabli | haha, yeaaaah :) Guess I need some time to get it.. But I really want to go through this | |
| 14:39:39 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Fix the FakeDriver using same hypervisor names https://review.openstack.org/456237 | |
| 14:48:26 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Transform instance.live_migration_rollback notification https://review.openstack.org/402124 | |
| 14:51:47 | mriedem | melwitt: a few comments/questions in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/454352/ but overall it looks good | |
| 14:53:08 | melwitt | mriedem: thanks, will reply to the outstanding comments soon | |
| 14:55:13 | mriedem | nkorabli: i don't see anything in the ML about that bug | |
| 14:55:16 | mriedem | are you sure you sent it? | |
| 14:56:17 | nkorabli | mriedem: I saved our conversation, and going through the links you sent me. I will ping you after, most likely I will have more questions | |
| 14:56:54 | nkorabli | hmm, I am pretty sure I did, but I haven't joined the mailing list before I did it | |
| 14:57:31 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposed block accepting AZ renames https://review.openstack.org/446446 | |
| 14:57:46 | nkorabli | mriedem: this was a topic: "[openstack-dev] [openstack-operators] [nova] User that shelves an instance becomes an owner of snapshot for that instance" | |
| 15:00:18 | nkorabli | and I sent it to "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org" on the 25th of March | |
| 15:00:46 | openstackgerrit | Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/nova master: Read Neutron port 'binding_profile' during boot https://review.openstack.org/449257 | |
| 15:03:49 | mriedem | nkorabli: you have to join the mailing list before you send something to it | |
| 15:03:52 | mriedem | it was probably rejected | |
| 15:04:12 | nkorabli | ohh, I see. I will do it again, then | |
| 15:22:16 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.volume_attach.error notification https://review.openstack.org/455801 | |
| 15:38:37 | mriedem | lyarwood: comments in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/437070/ - mostly questions about the upgrade impact | |
| 15:39:07 | openstackgerrit | Jianghua Wang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support VGPU https://review.openstack.org/450122 | |
| 15:40:37 | mriedem | lyarwood: i'm also not sure how you're going to implement a libvirt-specific encryption provider that doesn't live in nova/volume/encryptors, but i think we could make that clean with a stevedore extension | |
| 15:41:35 | openstackgerrit | Jianghua Wang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support VGPU https://review.openstack.org/450122 | |
| 15:41:38 | mriedem | like we could have 3 encryptors registered, and each encryptor defines a type (so we'd have 1 cryptsetup and 2 luks registered), a weight, and an is_supported() or is_available() method | |
| 15:42:23 | mriedem | so for this case, we filter down to the 2 luks encryptors, then filter based on is_available() - the cryptsetup one we have always returns True, but the qemu one has to check versions. then depending on the final list, we sort them based on weight | |
| 15:42:38 | mriedem | so the qemu one is always weighed higher than the cryptsetup luks one, if we have to pick | |
| 15:43:30 | mriedem | we don't need those implementation details in the spec though, i just got thinking about it | |
| 15:51:51 | lyarwood | mriedem: sorry was afk, reading now. | |
| 15:52:24 | lyarwood | mriedem: upgrade impact is something I missed out, I'll get something in there for that now. | |
| 15:54:23 | lyarwood | mriedem: re stevedore, I'm not sure how that would work tbh, for this to work with libvirt/qemu I assumed we would need to check ahead of connect_volume to know which approach we are going to use. | |
| 15:54:35 | lyarwood | mriedem: that's well ahead of the encryptor.attach_volume calls we currently have | |
| 15:55:06 | lyarwood | mriedem: so unless we rework that flow so we are calling the encryptors before connecting the volume I don't see how that's going to work | |
| 15:55:14 | lyarwood | mriedem: but I'm likely missing something here | |
| 15:57:36 | openstackgerrit | Simon Dodsley proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Enhanced KVM Storage QoS https://review.openstack.org/340168 | |
| 16:01:42 | mriedem | i probably need to go through and look at the flow too | |
| 16:03:29 | mriedem | lyarwood: oh i see, in attach_volume in the driver we call connect_volume before encryptor.attach_volume | |
| 16:03:49 | mriedem | and libvirt driver has it's own _get_volume_encryptor | |
| 16:03:55 | mriedem | so we could sneak it in there i guess | |
| 16:04:10 | mriedem | if type == luks and native_luks_available: use the new hotness | |
| 16:04:23 | mriedem | else call encryptors.get_volume_encryptor as before | |
| 16:04:43 | lyarwood | yup that's what I had in mind | |
| 16:05:34 | mriedem | ok nvm then | |
| 16:05:50 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/os-vif master: doc: Add glossary https://review.openstack.org/452666 | |
| 16:05:52 | mriedem | i don't know how we track the upgrade impact for the old style detach | |
| 16:06:09 | mriedem | can we determine that by looking at the guest config? | |
| 16:06:44 | lyarwood | yeah we should be able to by looking at the disk xml / config object | |
| 16:07:12 | mriedem | could this should work nicely then | |
| 16:07:16 | mriedem | s/could/cool/ | |
| 16:15:01 | openstackgerrit | Simon Dodsley proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Enhanced KVM Storage QoS https://review.openstack.org/340168 | |
| 16:17:23 | mriedem | sfinucan: it's odd that 'default_schedule_zone' lives in CONF.compute | |
| 16:17:30 | mriedem | well, i guess it's in [DEFAULT] right now | |
| 16:17:34 | mriedem | but it's looked up in the api | |
| 16:17:56 | mriedem | but the option is defined in nova/conf/compute.py; seems that should live in nova/conf/availability_zone.py | |
| 16:18:14 | mriedem | i believe i'll move it | |
| 16:19:42 | mriedem | also, that option is super confusing when we also have default_availability_zone | |
| 16:23:46 | openstackgerrit | Maciej Szankin proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add API impact to remove-nova-cert spec https://review.openstack.org/456284 | |
| 16:24:40 | macsz | mriedem: i added the API impact for os-cloudpipe in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/456284/ | |
| 16:25:45 | mriedem | macsz: thanks +W | |
| 16:32:52 | openstackgerrit | Jon Bernard proposed openstack/nova master: Add tempest-dsvm-ceph-rc https://review.openstack.org/456292 | |
| 16:33:01 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Amend spec for placement project/user association https://review.openstack.org/454352 | |
| 16:45:27 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Sort CellMappingList.get_all() for safety https://review.openstack.org/443174 | |
| 16:45:28 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Clean up ClientRouter debt https://review.openstack.org/444487 | |
| 16:45:29 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add workaround to disable group policy check upcall https://review.openstack.org/442736 | |
| 16:46:07 | mriedem | dansmith: you might want to get this spec update for melwitt https://review.openstack.org/#/c/454352/ | |
| 16:54:45 | openstackgerrit | Jianghua Wang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support VGPU https://review.openstack.org/450122 | |
| 16:57:26 | dansmith | melwitt: mriedem: am I missing where we say what we do if they use an old microversion and don't provide the user/project? | |
| 16:58:52 | mriedem | dansmith: that's the online data migration hand wave | |
| 16:59:00 | dansmith | no | |
| 16:59:08 | melwitt | dansmith: no, I didn't mention anything specifically about that. I guess I assumed it would just do what it was doing before. which means there we would have to keep two schema versions, one for the new one | |
| 16:59:10 | dansmith | I mean what happens if I call the api with microversion 1.0 and don't provide it | |
| 16:59:19 | dansmith | okay | |
| 16:59:45 | dansmith | I guess in that case we just can't query those things by project, but it's not a huge problem | |
| 16:59:48 | mriedem | right PUT /allocations/consumer_id at 1.0 doesn't require project_id/user_id | |
| 16:59:53 | mriedem | right | |
| 16:59:59 | dansmith | cells meeting now, but will continue when we're done | |
| 17:00:04 | mriedem | we will already have existing allocations that don't have the consumers table populated | |
| 17:00:21 | melwitt | not after the migration though | |
| 17:00:24 | jianghuaw_ | sfinucan, vladikr, jaypipes: Would you please help to have a look at this review: https://review.openstack.org/450122 | |
| 17:00:26 | jianghuaw_ | thanks. | |
| 17:01:51 | vladikr | jianghuaw, sure, thanks | |
| 17:03:11 | openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/455960 | |
| 17:12:22 | dansmith | mriedem: melwitt: so I guess I was just thinking about what happens if we continue to accept calls without the tenant info and keep putting things into the db without them | |
| 17:12:50 | dansmith | I guess it's just tough noogies for the quota stuff but otherwise not a huge deal | |
| 17:13:08 | melwitt | dansmith: oh, hm. I didn't think of that | |
| 17:14:04 | openstackgerrit | Jianghua Wang proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Support VGPU https://review.openstack.org/450122 | |
| 17:15:16 | melwitt | dansmith: since we are the ones putting allocations (resource tracker), old computes would be putting allocations without project/user. and that would have happened after the online data migration? or do we have the operator run that after the upgrade is completed | |
| 17:15:21 | mriedem | dansmith: yeah we can't really do anything about it | |
| 17:15:51 | mriedem | melwitt: the old computes can still be posting allocations w/o project/user | |
| 17:15:57 | mriedem | so, | |
| 17:16:11 | melwitt | yeah, I know, but I mean after all computes are upgraded, is that when the online data migration via nova-manage is supposed to be run? | |
| 17:16:18 | mriedem | we could pin the counting quotas stuff on compute level, so we can't rely on placement until all computes are upgraded | |
| 17:16:20 | melwitt | because that would clean it up | |
| 17:16:30 | mriedem | the online data migration can be run whenever i think | |
| 17:16:33 | mriedem | it's idempotent | |
| 17:16:46 | mriedem | this might also be something we need to check in nova-status | |
| 17:16:47 | melwitt | yeah, true can't rely on placement until all computes upgraded | |