| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-04-26 | |||
| 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? | |
| 21:03:19 | mordred | dansmith: that also highlights one of the big disconnects between what users want and what developers are funded to work on/maintain | |
| 21:03:35 | dansmith | mordred: well, might've been a disconnect a couple weeks ago, but yeah | |
| 21:05:51 | openstackgerrit | Steve Noyes proposed openstack/nova master: Add Cinder v3 detach to local_cleanup https://review.openstack.org/456851 | |
| 21:07:03 | mriedem | dansmith: heh, and lxc more than both of those | |
| 21:07:13 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 21:07:23 | mriedem | which if people are using lxc, | |
| 21:07:35 | mriedem | i'd sure like them to upstream their patch that makes the CI not completely fall over itself when deleting an instance | |
| 21:07:45 | dansmith | heh yeah | |
| 21:12:23 | mriedem | i'd like to ask for feedback on newish things like placement and cells v2 but with a bunch of deployments on kilo, that's going to be hard to get | |
| 21:14:08 | openstackgerrit | Rick Bartra proposed openstack/nova master: Add policy granularity to the Flavors API https://review.openstack.org/449288 | |
| 21:14:10 | mriedem | 1. Are you using REST API microversions > 2.1? | |
| 21:14:11 | mriedem | 2. Have you started evaluating or testing the Placement service? | |
| 21:14:11 | mriedem | 3. Have you started evaluating or testing Cells v2? | |
| 21:14:13 | mriedem | is my list right now | |
| 21:14:51 | cfriesen | mriedem: speaking of cells v2, the Newton release notes don't talk about the increase in the number of DB connections due to the need for services to talk to both DBs. | |
| 21:15:06 | mriedem | cfriesen: sorry i saw your earlier question about the api | |
| 21:15:22 | mriedem | cfriesen: i think you can disable the api from going directly to the db | |
| 21:15:35 | dansmith | mriedem: you can't | |
| 21:15:36 | mriedem | i was trying to answer this for someone internally last night | |
| 21:15:41 | dansmith | and I have no plans to head that way | |