| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-06-05 | |||
| 15:57:15 | sdague | mriedem: it's only 4 seconds for start | |
| 15:57:30 | mriedem | http://logs.openstack.org/95/468095/2/gate/gate-shade-functional/3f5d8dc/logs/devstacklog.txt.gz#_2017-06-02_12_45_10_006 | |
| 15:58:08 | mriedem | so we start placement-api 32 seconds after we start nova-compute, | |
| 15:58:22 | mriedem | nova-compute starts up and tries to register the compute node with placement but gets a 503 b/c placement isn't up yet, | |
| 15:58:33 | mriedem | meanwhile, the compute host is mapped to the cell and tests start, | |
| 15:59:00 | mriedem | test tries to create a server, scheduler asks placement for a resource provider (compute node) for the server, there are 0 because none are registered, and the server create fails, | |
| 15:59:18 | mriedem | 15 seconds later, n-cpu registers the compute node with placement during it's periodic task to update avialable resources (1 minute cron) | |
| 15:59:21 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement project_id, user_id in PUT /allocations https://review.openstack.org/469634 | |
| 15:59:21 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: Add GET /usages to placement API https://review.openstack.org/469635 | |
| 15:59:22 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: use separate tables for projects/users https://review.openstack.org/470645 | |
| 15:59:22 | mriedem | mordred: ^ | |
| 16:01:02 | mriedem | cdent: edleafe: jaypipes: dansmith: can someone summarize whatever changes are coming out of the hangout you just had in the dev ML please? | |
| 16:01:10 | dansmith | mriedem: jay is on it | |
| 16:01:15 | jaypipes | mriedem: yes. | |
| 16:01:21 | jaypipes | mriedem: I will. etherpad being worked. | |
| 16:01:26 | mriedem | ok thanks | |
| 16:01:47 | sdague | mriedem: yeh, our order is super bonkers | |
| 16:01:49 | sdague | we should fix that | |
| 16:01:56 | cdent | mriedem: the devstack problem, appears to be that fundamentally placement starts after nova in stack.sh | |
| 16:02:06 | mriedem | cdent: yeah | |
| 16:02:07 | sdague | I actually have no idea why placement comes after nova, that's just silly | |
| 16:02:21 | sdague | someone propose the ordering patch, and I'll fast approve | |
| 16:02:27 | mriedem | i think it's because nova.sh sets up the config or something? | |
| 16:02:36 | mriedem | might be circular dep | |
| 16:02:39 | cdent | we can start later though | |
| 16:02:45 | sdague | mriedem: the config stage is a lot earlier | |
| 16:02:47 | cdent | we can config after but start before | |
| 16:02:49 | sdague | and should be done | |
| 16:02:50 | cdent | I'll push somehting | |
| 16:02:55 | cdent | one sec | |
| 16:02:57 | sdague | yeh | |
| 16:03:21 | cdent | is there a bug to related to in the commit? | |
| 16:03:34 | mriedem | cdent: https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1695634 | |
| 16:03:34 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1695634 in devstack "Something weird just broke in creating servers" [Undecided,New] | |
| 16:07:10 | cdent | sdague, mriedem : https://review.openstack.org/471042 | |
| 16:07:16 | cdent | i started before neutron and cinder too | |
| 16:10:40 | mriedem | cdent: question inline | |
| 16:12:58 | cdent | mriedem: answer inline | |
| 16:18:22 | mriedem | ok i'd just remove the comment | |
| 16:18:24 | mriedem | the note i mean | |
| 16:18:27 | mriedem | the comment is fine, the note is confusing | |
| 16:18:32 | cdent | k | |
| 16:19:03 | cdent | done | |
| 16:19:20 | mriedem | thanks | |
| 16:28:21 | mordred | cdent, mriedem: woot! thank you! | |
| 16:29:13 | mordred | I'm glad this turned out to be potentially an actual issue and not just a random testing weird | |
| 16:29:21 | cdent | was a good spot | |
| 16:29:41 | cdent | that the problem hasn't come up sooner is odd | |
| 16:29:49 | cdent | you must be doing something faster than other things are | |
| 16:30:05 | mordred | yah. it's still interesting why it only started showing up friday | |
| 16:30:29 | cdent | did reverting that change you reverted make any difference? | |
| 16:30:32 | mriedem | i don't see anything in devstack or nova around friday that would cause the start time issue | |
| 16:30:35 | mordred | cdent: we have a very low overhead to start running tests and our tests are all pretty quick - so I think we're a really good race from end-of-devstack to "and now stuff is running" | |
| 16:31:32 | mordred | mriedem: onlything I can think of is that something about the fix for the stacktrace maybe also caused something to not issue an extra registration sync | |
| 16:31:57 | mriedem | my patch stopped doing the pointless update_instance_info rpc cast from n-cpu to n-sch | |
| 16:31:59 | mordred | so maybe there was an accidental retry happening that the stacktrace fix removed? | |
| 16:31:59 | cdent | periodic job timing? | |
| 16:32:00 | mriedem | sending an empty list | |
| 16:32:38 | mriedem | the periodic kicks in ~1 minute after init_host on the compute | |
| 16:33:11 | mriedem | if update_instance_info were an rpc call that would make sense why things were slower during n-cpu startup, but it's a cast | |
| 16:33:17 | cdent | If I remember right, init_host calls all the same stuff that the periodic does/ | |
| 16:33:33 | jaypipes | edleafe, dansmith, cdent, alex_xu: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/placement-allocations-straw-man | |
| 16:33:57 | mriedem | cdent: the pre_start_hook calls update_available_resource | |
| 16:34:06 | mriedem | which calls the RT to create the ComputeNode record and do some things yeah | |
| 16:34:19 | mriedem | that's different from the update_instance_info stuff cast to the scheduler | |
| 16:34:24 | cdent | thanks jaypipes, I'm going home, will look from there, where the lack of people ought to allow proper attention | |
| 16:34:29 | mriedem | ^ is all about server group affinity/anti-affinity filters | |
| 16:34:30 | jaypipes | kk | |
| 16:35:13 | dansmith | jaypipes: can I reset colors on that so we can see only deltas from this? | |
| 16:35:21 | cdent | dansmith++ | |
| 16:35:22 | jaypipes | dansmith: go for it. | |
| 16:35:25 | cfriesen_ | there are so many races around server group affinity/antiaffinity it's not even funny | |
| 16:37:36 | cfriesen_ | jaypipes: is it possible to have floating point values for resources? | |
| 16:37:45 | cfriesen_ | or is it integer only? | |
| 16:37:59 | jaypipes | cfriesen_: integer only. | |
| 16:39:03 | cfriesen_ | jaypipes: we currently allow a mix of instances with shared/dedicated cpus on the same compute node (with cpusets to keep the affinity straight) and so report usage as floating point. I guess we'll move to fixed point with placement. | |
| 16:43:35 | edleafe | jaypipes: running out for a bit, so I'll go more in depth when I get back. | |
| 16:44:27 | sdague | mriedem: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/467242/ is the glance request_id change ready to go in | |
| 16:46:31 | jaypipes | cfriesen_: what do you mean "report usage as floating point"? | |
| 16:51:51 | jaypipes | dansmith, mriedem: the three of us are having a very Reggae-colored conversation on this etherpad. | |
| 16:52:35 | mriedem | wish i had some ganja | |
| 16:53:39 | jaypipes | mriedem: if you lived in Sarasota... | |
| 16:56:12 | cfriesen_ | jaypipes: we report the CPU usage of a compute node as sum(dedicated vcpus) + sum(shared vcpus)/cpu_allocation_ratio. The total cannot be more than the available CPUs on the compute node. | |
| 16:57:27 | cfriesen_ | jaypipes: with integer usage we'll just have to multiply everything by cpu_allocation_ratio | |
| 16:57:36 | jaypipes | cfriesen_: yup. | |
| 17:04:04 | cfriesen_ | who's responsible for releasenotes issues? My commit https://review.openstack.org/#/c/435141 keeps failing jenkins because it chokes on an older releasenotes file. Something seems to have gotten more strict recently. | |
| 17:04:15 | mriedem | sdague: +2 | |
| 17:05:22 | mriedem | cfriesen_: open a novaclient bug | |
| 17:06:56 | mriedem | my guess would be something with sphinx 1.6.1 or 1.6.2 | |
| 17:07:01 | mriedem | 1.6.1 is blacklisted but 1.6.2 isn't | |
| 17:07:08 | cfriesen_ | mriedem: okay | |
| 17:08:22 | mriedem | jaypipes: we should have a separate bp and spec for this new placement api thing, the claims in the scheduler bp will depend on it | |
| 17:08:42 | mriedem | but i assume you want to communicate it to the ML so it sinks in a bit first | |
| 17:12:13 | sdague | cfriesen_: it might be worth checking with dhellman or the like | |
| 17:12:18 | mriedem | i know the fix | |
| 17:12:20 | mriedem | just need the bug | |
| 17:12:24 | mriedem | testing locally | |
| 17:13:02 | mriedem | not sure why it passed before though | |
| 17:13:54 | cfriesen_ | mriedem: https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-novaclient/+bug/1695939 | |
| 17:13:54 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1695939 in python-novaclient "jenkins failing on older releasenote file" [Undecided,New] | |