Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-05-04
19:50:45 dansmith unless you mean something else
19:50:46 dansmith -u?
19:51:23 dansmith journalctl | grep systemd yields not much of relevance
19:51:39 sdague -t
19:51:40 sdague sorry
19:51:53 dansmith same as the grep
19:52:05 edleafe bauzas: should be ready to upload soon. I've already created a unit test.
19:52:11 sdague ok, so default seems to be 1000 messages per 30s
19:52:17 sdague I am sure we are exceeding that
19:52:23 dansmith surely at startup
19:54:05 sdague let me put in a fix for that
19:54:13 dansmith cool thanks
19:54:26 dansmith link me and I'll depend on it and recheck
19:56:18 melwitt dansmith: so the websocketproxy goes direct to the instance? it doesn't need to know the compute host MQ right
19:56:44 dansmith it goes direct to the host
19:56:59 dansmith consoleauth validate_token does talk to the compute mq, but it does the looku
19:57:17 melwitt okay. we'll just have to see the logs then, nothing is jumping out at me
19:57:20 dansmith I think the token in memcache must have the ip/port that the proxy needs to connect to
19:57:21 dansmith yeah
19:57:28 dansmith hopefully something dumb
19:57:32 dansmith simple and dumb
19:57:34 dansmith like me.
19:57:44 sdague dansmith: I think this is it - https://review.openstack.org/462725
19:57:46 melwitt lol :P
19:58:42 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Canary test against multi-cell devstack https://review.openstack.org/458537
19:58:44 dansmith sdague: ack thanks
19:58:56 dansmith sdague: if that's really happening we probably want to merge that like.. yesterday :P
19:59:03 mriedem gibi: i rebased and commented in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/419730/ for adding keypairs to InstancePayload - summary is i don't think we should lazy load instance.keypairs for every instance action, for the same reason I didn't want to do that for instance.tags
20:00:26 sdague dansmith: yep agreed, I want to make sure it looks sane
20:00:37 sdague hey, it's all about learning new things :)
20:02:13 dansmith sdague: I'm not complaining :)
20:03:11 sdague also, what's up with the linuxbridge job?
20:03:17 sdague that seem things to be hating me today
20:04:24 dansmith sdague: that was an impressively incomprehensible exclamation
20:04:45 openstackgerrit Ed Leafe proposed openstack/nova master: Don't delete allocation if instance being scheduled https://review.openstack.org/460177
20:04:55 edleafe bauzas: Here ya go ^^
20:05:33 dansmith what is this nonsense? http://logs.openstack.org/79/462679/1/check/gate-nova-tox-functional-ubuntu-xenial/c760042/testr_results.html.gz
20:05:37 bauzas edleafe: okay, I'll update the next top changes
20:07:06 melwitt dansmith: socket_options, duh
20:07:26 melwitt :D
20:10:49 cdent dansmith: might be mismatched versions of urllib3 and wsgi-intercept
20:11:03 cdent I saw that a while back but thought it was better.
20:11:03 dansmith cdent: it's broken is what it is
20:11:20 dansmith looks rather fundamental, so wondering if it's worth a recheck
20:11:25 cdent yessir, but I think it got better. are your deps maybe stale?
20:11:35 dansmith that patch is new from today
20:11:39 cdent hmmm
20:12:00 dansmith I guess edleafe already rechecked it
20:12:15 cdent i'll mess with it a bit
20:12:19 cdent (locally)
20:12:24 mriedem can't provide new key_name on rebuild?
20:17:28 melwitt mriedem: I don't think you can specify anything other than the image. there have been requests to allow new userdata and such, but the answer has been "just boot a new instance" if you're looking at re-imaging it anyway
20:18:04 mriedem do we rebuild the config drive during rebulid?
20:18:32 melwitt I don't think so
20:18:50 melwitt but not sure, not a config drive expert
20:19:24 mriedem i'm looking, just this keypair notification patch has me thinking about weird stuf
20:19:29 mriedem https://review.openstack.org/#/c/419730/
20:19:40 mriedem b/c i don't want to lazy-load instance.keypairs for every gd instance action notification
20:19:40 melwitt we definitely don't change anything on it. I don't know if it is "recreated" at all though
20:20:00 mriedem jaypipes: dansmith: ^ same predicament as with the instance.tags patch
20:20:08 mriedem for notifications that is
20:21:28 mriedem which would include every vm/task state change if you enabled that option...
20:21:50 mriedem CONF.notifications.notify_on_state_change i mean
20:22:23 melwitt preload all the things
20:22:29 melwitt jk
20:22:42 mriedem well someone proposed that for instance.tags,
20:22:44 mriedem preload by default
20:22:47 jroll just keep the whole db in RAM, wcpgw
20:22:47 mriedem we nacked that
20:23:10 melwitt see, jroll knows what I'm talkin about
20:23:13 openstackgerrit Alex Szarka proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.exists notification https://review.openstack.org/403660
20:23:14 mriedem i worry that some of the perf issues people are reporting in newton/ocata are due to all of the versioned notifications doing lazy-loads like crazy
20:24:02 jroll melwitt: :D
20:24:07 jroll feels like state change notifications shouldn't need tags, keypairs, etc
20:25:15 mriedem that's what i've said
20:25:19 mriedem and pushed back on
20:25:22 mriedem nor bdms...
20:25:35 mriedem we're basically throwing the kitchen sink at the notification consumer
20:26:00 mriedem because (1) we can and (2) we don't know what notification consumers even want/need
20:26:06 jaypipes mriedem: currently reviewing dansmith's target_cell patches. will get to those a little later (all the notification ones)
20:26:22 mriedem jaypipes: you don't really need to probably, just thinking out loud
20:26:25 mriedem i've already -1ed
20:26:39 jroll mriedem: and I just realized (3) notifications are considered lossy, so we can't assume consumers have state n-1 to diff properly
20:26:49 melwitt :\ a lot of people use notifications, I thought. so one would think we would have some idea what notification consumers want
20:26:55 jroll is the most sensible reason to me
20:27:20 mriedem melwitt: rebuild calls virt driver destroy and then spawn, so i'd think we're rebuilding the config drive...
20:27:33 mriedem but i guess you just get the same key as before
20:28:17 melwitt mriedem: yeah, I don't know what the term "rebuild" means in the context of config drive. I know we don't change it
20:28:25 mriedem melwitt: the only consumers i know of really are ceilometer, mistral and searchlight
20:28:47 mriedem not sure how much ceilometer is used, and since they didn't get the stuff they needed in the notifications years ago, they just hit the rest api
20:28:56 mriedem not sure about mistral or searchlight
20:29:44 melwitt notifications were supposed to be the answer to instance actions records. I have used those before in a previous life. and notifications, but just to know the history of what happened to an instance when the customer comes calling
20:33:43 mriedem melwitt: what i meant by rebuild was really recreate, since destroy_disks=True when driver.destroy is called during rebuild
20:33:52 mriedem so i think that will delete the config drive for the instance from the host,
20:33:56 mriedem and then spawn would recreate it
20:34:29 cdent edleafe, dansmith: I narrowed down the sitch on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462679/ and left a comment there
20:34:46 cdent I can push the fix if desired
20:35:14 melwitt mriedem: I see what you mean. that makes sense with the requests too since it's being recreated anyhow and people think, why not allow metadata changes
20:36:23 mriedem right so i for whatever reason thought you could provide a new key during a rebuild,
20:36:42 mriedem and since i was -1ing that review saying scope the full keypair object to just a couple of notifications, like instance.create,

Earlier   Later