Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-04-20
11:15:45 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Ah-ha
11:15:57 johnthetubaguy ... but the folks who stepped up to do that just got laid off, so thats going to need another new owner
11:16:32 alex_xu :(
11:17:15 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Oh, from which company are the said folks, if I may ask?
11:17:25 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Abort Cold Migration https://review.openstack.org/334732
11:17:29 johnthetubaguy rackspace/OSIC
11:17:33 kashyap Ah-ha
11:17:43 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Specify keymap on server boot https://review.openstack.org/448830
11:18:58 johnthetubaguy kashyap: I think matt is getting a list of all the impacted priority items that need owners now, but still not sure whats happening to everyone yet
11:19:16 kashyap johnthetubaguy: Yeah, understood. Thank you
11:29:27 openstackgerrit Zhenyu Zheng proposed openstack/nova master: Support tag instances when boot https://review.openstack.org/394321
11:32:21 zioproto dansmith: hey are here ?
11:32:54 zioproto dansmith: remember when we fixed something in the nova migrations for the db upgrade from mitaka to newton ?
11:33:54 zioproto dansmith: I am testing now the migration of my production database... and I get these output
11:34:05 zioproto dansmith: https://pastebin.com/NU85iyqN any ideas ?
11:35:08 zioproto all those ERROR message dont look any good
11:36:34 johnthetubaguy I see "not all services that access the DB directly are updated to the latest version"
11:37:16 johnthetubaguy zioproto: not sure if that helps, but has you got everything upgrade before you do the data migrations for that release?
11:38:18 zioproto what I am doing here
11:38:27 zioproto I just get a dump of the production database
11:38:37 zioproto and I put it on a new db, that no other software touches
11:38:42 zioproto I install nova on this server
11:38:50 zioproto and I just run the commands you see in the pastebin
11:38:54 zioproto it is just to test the migrations
11:39:13 zioproto the database is my mitaka production database
11:39:42 zioproto and the packages I install are ubuntu nova Installed: 2:14.0.4-0ubuntu1.2~cloud0
11:39:55 zioproto johnthetubaguy: makes sense to do the test in this way ?
11:57:09 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Fix unnecessary code block in a release note https://review.openstack.org/458472
11:57:18 johnthetubaguy zioproto: sorry, just heading for my lunch, I think you need to update the service records to pretend they are running newton, before you can run the newton data migrations
12:07:07 zioproto johnthetubaguy: thanks I will try that
12:25:25 zioproto johnthetubaguy: I had to fix the thing with 'delete from services where deleted_at is not NULL;'
12:25:52 zioproto looks like if you have in your database services flagged as deleted this can break the migration
12:32:31 johnthetubaguy zioproto: ah, that rings a bell, I think dansmith has patch that already https://github.com/openstack/nova/commit/2e05c82b807624b8420df4c94d68b75563b230d2 I guess its not in the package
12:32:58 johnthetubaguy actually, yeah, looks like thats not in a tagged release quite yet
12:33:01 asettle nicolasbock: Hey if you're around, I need a nova docs CPL ;) https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1683104 and https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1683071
12:33:01 openstack Launchpad bug 1683104 in openstack-manuals "instance is not created rightly" [Undecided,New]
12:33:02 openstack Launchpad bug 1683071 in openstack-manuals "error installing nova-common" [Undecided,New]
12:33:17 asettle I just need someone to help verify :(
12:33:25 zioproto Yes but this commit is in Mitaka
12:33:31 zioproto I am confused
12:33:47 nicolasbock asettle, ok, let me have a look
12:33:51 asettle Thanks :)
12:36:04 zioproto johnthetubaguy: maybe you are right, this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/438630/ is only in 14.0.5
12:36:14 zioproto and I have 14.0.4
13:21:15 efried mriedem Good morning. When you have a sec - I noticed in your "Reflections" email the term "shared storage pools" - was wondering what that means?
13:23:32 mriedem a pool, of shared storage
13:23:55 mriedem efried: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/implemented/generic-resource-pools.html
13:25:32 efried mriedem Okay, thanks. PowerVM has Shared Storage Pools (capitals intentional) which is a very specific technology based on a cluster of VIOSes etc. Just wanting to anticipate future confusion that will be caused by e.g. https://review.openstack.org/443189
13:26:16 mriedem it's just a file share isn't it?
13:26:31 dansmith zioproto: yep, what johnthetubaguy said.. there are some data migrations that won't run without the services having been updated yet
13:26:38 dansmith zioproto: specifically one, that PciDevice one
13:26:50 dansmith zioproto: if you don't use any pci devices in your deployment then it won't do anything when it runs anyway
13:27:01 johnthetubaguy dansmith: it sounds like he was missing your fix up for the delete services thingy
13:27:15 johnthetubaguy old packages
13:27:16 johnthetubaguy well... older
13:27:18 traskat hey, what i have to do apply to apply extra specs to running VMs for examaple disk IO limitations?
13:27:27 dansmith johnthetubaguy: ah maybe
13:27:28 sfinucan mriedem: Could you take a look at these today? https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bump-min-libvirt
13:27:39 mriedem sfinucan: i can
13:28:01 sfinucan mriedem: Cheers
13:28:15 efried mriedem PowerVM SSP? No. The VIOSes share a pool of SAN disks and carve out LUs, which can then be attached to VMs. Things like thin clones are supported. Aforementioned patch allows multiple separate hosts (which otherwise don't communicate with each other) to share a SSP, including sharing images.
13:29:16 efried The VIOSes use an AIX-specific cluster technology, and an AIX-specific shared file system type.
13:29:32 mriedem efried: at a high level it's the same concept for modeling it in the placement service
13:29:39 mriedem it's a shared storage resource provider,
13:29:54 mriedem which will be in an aggregate relationship with the compute node resource providers that it serves disk to
13:30:19 efried mriedem Cool, maybe we ( thorst ) can look into folding PowerVM SSP into that concept. Thanks.
13:30:53 mriedem so rather than each compute node resource provider reporting it has 100TB of disk or whatever the pool size is, which would be a lie if you have 10 computes for the same storage (10*100TB), you'd model it so that the 10 compute RPs share the same disk RP with 100TB
13:31:08 mriedem efried: it's an operator thing to set it up properly
13:31:22 efried But we would have to enable/support it.
13:31:34 mriedem jaypipes or cdent or edleafe can correct me if i'm wrong
13:32:17 edleafe mriedem: correctamundo
13:33:41 jaypipes efried: totes. the VIOSes in AIX on PVM SSPs on SAN. yep, totes.
13:34:01 openstackgerrit Sandeep Pawar proposed openstack/nova master: Libvirt volume driver for Veritas HyperScale https://review.openstack.org/443951
13:36:09 thorst efried: yeah, we should definitely fold into that concept... (was afk)
13:36:50 efried thorst adreznec Let's queue it up for discussion in our box doc.
13:37:38 thorst yep
13:37:49 thorst we may have some FS ones in the same boat.
13:39:12 efried thorst Though it looks like maybe there is no affordance for it to be automated - the deployer just has to know which hosts are sharing an SSP and run these resource-provider set inventory commands accordingly.
13:40:00 thorst well, we've got a command to tell them all the hosts sharing...so. Maybe something to doc for that process.
13:40:38 efried Would be kinda neat if there was a method on the compute driver that could be asked to provide some kind of identifier for the shared resource (the SSP UUID in this case?) so the controller can figure out the pool on its own.
13:40:50 efried mriedem edleafe jaypipes Future enhancement ^^ ?
13:41:24 efried (though I haven't finished reading the spec yet ;-)
13:41:37 jaypipes efried: in case it wasn't obvious, I was being sarcastic above. :)
13:42:07 efried jaypipes Oh, it wasn't.
13:42:10 efried To me
13:42:22 jaypipes efried: I was poking fun at your TLAs :P
13:42:41 efried Gotcha. IBM does love its TLAs.
13:42:59 jaypipes efried: joking aside, I don't see anything that would prevent SSPs from being used as shared resource providers, no.
13:43:28 openstackgerrit Roman Podoliaka proposed openstack/osc-placement master: CLI for resource providers https://review.openstack.org/457532
13:43:29 openstackgerrit Roman Podoliaka proposed openstack/osc-placement master: CLI for inventories https://review.openstack.org/457533
13:43:29 openstackgerrit Roman Podoliaka proposed openstack/osc-placement master: CLI for allocations https://review.openstack.org/457534
13:43:29 openstackgerrit Roman Podoliaka proposed openstack/osc-placement master: CLI for usages https://review.openstack.org/457535
13:43:44 efried jaypipes Agree. But seems like it should be possible without operator intervention - at least in the narrow case I'm thinking about.
13:44:15 jaypipes efried: yes, indeed.
13:44:21 efried Not sure if possible in the general case.
13:44:47 efried I would think it should be possible if the shared storage was via NFS.
13:45:10 efried As long as the computes had a reliable way to canonicalize the host and mountpoint.
13:45:17 rpodolyaka cdent: thanks for your input on osc-placement changes! it's good to have a pair of fresh eyes on this
13:46:08 thorst could do the old - have each compute create a file on the share...and then have the compute drivers report back what they see. From that you could figure out who can see who...
13:46:15 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: encryptors: Switch to os-brick encryptor classes https://review.openstack.org/391597

Earlier   Later