| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-04-26 | |||
| 19:34:47 | melwitt | jaypipes: I tried to make it make sense but I failed, so sorry about that :( | |
| 19:35:00 | jaypipes | melwitt: and you're not the cause of the indecipherability :) | |
| 19:35:33 | melwitt | my goal was to code comment it enough to where laypersons could understand it | |
| 19:36:47 | melwitt | because learning it myself was extremely painful and wanted to make it easier for others | |
| 19:37:41 | melwitt | jaypipes: the dicts returned from count() are evil and that was me, I will try to think of another way | |
| 19:38:06 | jaypipes | melwitt: yeah, I hear ya. definitely not bemoaning your code. it's just a pit of vipers in general. | |
| 19:38:35 | melwitt | I know. not taken that way :) | |
| 19:38:44 | jaypipes | k, cool :) | |
| 19:43:00 | mriedem | jaypipes: ok, replied in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/460281/ as well, | |
| 19:43:05 | melwitt | mriedem: been meaning to tell you about this, I found a bug in the BackOffLoopingCall that was causing that ironic test to timeout intermittently (160s test timeout whereas the backoff timeout should have expired well before that) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459790/ | |
| 19:43:22 | mriedem | jaypipes: also mentioned at a higher level that i don't know that the plan as you describe it in there is actually written down anywhere | |
| 19:44:25 | mriedem | melwitt: heh, nice, i guess that really bugged you | |
| 19:45:31 | jaypipes | mriedem: I got dinged for being too verbose in specs, then dinged for not having everything written down ahead of time... | |
| 19:45:38 | jaypipes | can't win for losin. | |
| 19:46:02 | melwitt | mriedem: yup, I became obsessed with it | |
| 19:46:17 | mriedem | jaypipes: i know | |
| 19:46:32 | jaypipes | mriedem: I'll try to write something up tomorrow. | |
| 19:46:46 | mriedem | jaypipes: i'm +2 on the change after you explained the plan, i just wouldn't have known otherwise | |
| 19:46:54 | jaypipes | understood. | |
| 19:52:37 | mordred | jaypipes: write down more things, but then delete hide them | |
| 19:52:47 | jaypipes | heh | |
| 19:59:54 | mriedem | jaypipes: dansmith: anything off the top of your head that we already know is going to be a focus for queens? besides just anything that doesn't make pike? things that come to mind are volume multiattach, cinder ephemeral / no local disk | |
| 19:59:58 | mriedem | removing caching scheduler isn't really a feature | |
| 20:00:08 | mriedem | but claims in scheduler would be required in queens | |
| 20:00:22 | jaypipes | mriedem: VGPU. | |
| 20:00:34 | dansmith | mriedem: full shared storage, shared network reporting and stuff | |
| 20:00:41 | jaypipes | mriedem: port pair allocations with SR-IOV. | |
| 20:00:41 | dansmith | mriedem: hopefully some locality/affinity in placement | |
| 20:00:50 | openstackgerrit | Abhishek Sharma M proposed openstack/nova master: Catching OverQuota Exception https://review.openstack.org/455118 | |
| 20:00:50 | openstackgerrit | Abhishek Sharma M proposed openstack/nova master: Catching OverQuota Exception https://review.openstack.org/460293 | |
| 20:00:54 | dansmith | yeah, GPU and SRIOV love in placement | |
| 20:00:57 | jaypipes | dansmith: yeah. ++ on affinity stuff. | |
| 20:01:06 | jaypipes | heh, much love. | |
| 20:04:24 | cburgess | dansmith mriedem Thinking fill shared storage and cinder ephemeral both probably depend on a re-write of the imagebackend interface and creating cleaner seperation and modularization of that area of the code. | |
| 20:05:44 | dansmith | that's at least a cycle of work probably | |
| 20:05:47 | dansmith | unless it's all we do | |
| 20:07:13 | cburgess | dansmith Probably right. Just trying to figure out how we could do shared storage or a cinder backend properly without fixing that dumpster fire induced miasma. | |
| 20:07:35 | dansmith | TIL a new word | |
| 20:07:57 | cburgess | lol | |
| 20:08:03 | cburgess | miasma? | |
| 20:08:37 | dansmith | no "shared" | |
| 20:08:39 | dansmith | yes miasma :P | |
| 20:09:00 | cburgess | I try and educate as well as provide bad ideas, and donuts, to the nova community. | |
| 20:09:13 | cburgess | Its just one of my many redeeming qualities. | |
| 20:09:13 | dansmith | and we thank you for it | |
| 20:10:42 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: do you think the user controlled port pair allocations will slip to queens? | |
| 20:11:10 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: considering it didn't land for Pike... yes. | |
| 20:11:13 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: i have been getting some question lately about doing bonding with sriov for ha and performacne which would need that | |
| 20:11:30 | sean-k-mooney | oh ya we are past spec deadline | |
| 20:15:35 | openstackgerrit | Rafael Folco proposed openstack/nova master: placement: Specific error for inventory in use https://review.openstack.org/460231 | |
| 20:29:41 | mriedem | jaypipes: i don't know what "port pair allocations with SR-IOV" means | |
| 20:30:44 | mriedem | dansmith: isn't gpu/sriov love in placement == nested resource providers == pike? | |
| 20:31:13 | dansmith | mriedem: there's virt driver work that needs to be done that I don't think is going to happen in pike | |
| 20:31:14 | dansmith | certainly for gpu | |
| 20:33:06 | mriedem | anything forward looking for cells v2 in queens? | |
| 20:33:19 | mriedem | besides fix all the bugs we introduce in pike? :) | |
| 20:33:30 | jaypipes | mriedem: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/182242/ | |
| 20:33:34 | mriedem | oh i suppose integration of limits in keystone | |
| 20:33:44 | jaypipes | ++ | |
| 20:33:57 | mriedem | jaypipes: oh right, that spec... | |
| 20:34:04 | dansmith | mriedem: well, yeah, all the bugs, but also presumably we'll have plenty of performance things to work out | |
| 20:34:30 | mriedem | jaypipes: that's the one where the "user" is a single tenant NFV machine right? | |
| 20:35:49 | mriedem | ok here is the list: "VGPU support, full shared storage/network reporting and affinity support in the placement service, volume multi-attach, Cinder as ephemeral backend, integration of limits in Keystone, Cells v2 hardening." | |
| 20:35:57 | mriedem | "+ delete shelve" | |
| 20:36:00 | mriedem | :) | |
| 20:36:11 | dansmith | you have my vote | |
| 20:36:29 | dansmith | HTTP 420: Sorry I dunno where I left that shelve feature.. please try again... uh, never. | |
| 20:36:45 | mriedem | stoner apis | |
| 20:36:46 | mriedem | psh | |
| 20:36:52 | dansmith | heh | |
| 20:37:47 | jaypipes | mriedem: yes. | |
| 20:40:05 | mriedem | (optional) Do you have questions for users that can help inform/guide your development teams? | |
| 20:40:10 | mriedem | oh boy | |
| 20:40:21 | mriedem | i can't remember what i asked about this for pike | |
| 20:41:05 | mriedem | "do you use any microversion > 2.1?" | |
| 20:41:09 | mriedem | that could be a legit question | |
| 20:41:09 | openstackgerrit | Abhishek Sharma M proposed openstack/nova master: Catching OverQuota Exception https://review.openstack.org/460305 | |
| 20:41:13 | dansmith | hah | |
| 20:41:52 | mriedem | b/c we're always coding 18 months ahead at least | |
| 20:41:54 | mriedem | and have no idea | |
| 20:51:57 | mriedem | "While the majority of users aren’t currently using Nova cells, about 146 deployments reported using cells, which is substantially more than the 67 users reporting using Nova cells one year ago. " | |
| 20:53:36 | abhi89 | johnthetubaguy: Hi | |
| 20:55:07 | abhi89 | Hi all.. can someone please review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/460305/ | |
| 20:55:19 | mordred | mriedem: I fully expect to start consuming microversions in the next 6 months | |
| 20:55:57 | mriedem | oh right this was the question | |
| 20:55:58 | mriedem | "How important is it to be able to customize Nova in your deployment? e.g. classload your own managers/drivers, use hooks, plug in API extensions, etc." | |
| 20:56:18 | mordred | I was very happy to see the low numbers of "we use this extensively" | |
| 20:56:23 | mriedem | 51% not important, 39% somewhat, 10% very | |
| 20:56:41 | mordred | s/low/lowish/ | |
| 20:57:10 | jaypipes | dansmith: you're gonna love all this shared resource provider SQL... | |
| 20:57:49 | mriedem | i see that neutron asked about actual feature usage/adoption | |
| 20:58:08 | mriedem | that's something we could breakdown at some point, and have wondered about, i.e. does anyone actually use shelve? | |
| 20:58:19 | mordred | edleafe: I'll try to start with an amuse bouche, but that's probably not too far off | |
| 20:58:49 | mordred | mriedem: I don't | |
| 20:59:55 | mriedem | page 60 https://www.openstack.org/assets/survey/April2017SurveyReport.pdf | |
| 21:00:21 | mriedem | breaking something down like that in nova wouldn't be trivial | |
| 21:00:33 | mordred | no - but it would be worthwhile | |
| 21:02:11 | dansmith | more than twice as many people patch in an unmaintained docker driver than use the in-tree xen support | |
| 21:02:21 | dansmith | I'll remember that next time I have to fix something in there | |
| 21:02:52 | cfriesen | I'm curious...are we expecting that eventually nova-api won't need a connection to the main nova db? | |