| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-06-12 | |||
| 13:39:08 | rfolco | cdent, so, without the current change, the new tests won't work. Makes sense ? | |
| 13:39:35 | mriedem | sfinucan: are you aware of any way to share a subset of dedicated cpus for an instance, e.g. my vm wants 8 vcpus, it is willing to share 2 of them but needs 6 of them dedicated just to itself. | |
| 13:39:35 | cdent | no, because you haven't changed anything on the placement server side in that patchset | |
| 13:39:51 | cdent | rfolco: you've only changed the client side | |
| 13:40:04 | cdent | and the gabbi tests don't interact with the client side | |
| 13:40:10 | sfinucan | mriedem: No, it's all or nothing | |
| 13:40:32 | mriedem | ok, thanks for confirming | |
| 13:41:14 | rfolco | cdent, well, I'm confused, because I had to increase the expected resource gen for each of those tests | |
| 13:42:00 | cdent | rfolco: because of changes that are already merged, yes? | |
| 13:42:27 | cdent | (when you added the DELETE method to the server) | |
| 13:44:27 | artom_ | mriedem, you had me doubting myself for a second there | |
| 13:44:39 | artom_ | I didn't hallucinate the code being duplicated | |
| 13:44:52 | rfolco | cdent, so why we actually do those increments like self._resource_providers[rp_uuid]['generation'] = cur_rp_gen + 1 ? | |
| 13:45:22 | mriedem | artom_: heh yeah i hadn't seen the actual code in that ocata backport yet | |
| 13:45:46 | rfolco | cdent, I remember after that suggestion on previous patchset, I had to change the gabbit tests and increase resource gen | |
| 13:45:48 | cdent | rfolco: because we can assume that on the server side the generication has incremented, because that's what happens when you do a write. the client side adjustment is to help keep the client side cache in sync | |
| 13:45:58 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: utils: Replace 'utf8' with oslo.utils equivalent https://review.openstack.org/466799 | |
| 13:46:45 | rfolco | cdent, fair. I'll address the new tests in a separate patch. Thanks. | |
| 13:46:54 | artom_ | Anyways, I'm supposed to be on PTO and I have two toddlers running around, I shouldn't even be here | |
| 13:47:02 | cdent | rfolco: no, thank you | |
| 13:47:14 | jaypipes | bauzas: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/473377/ is the initial work around the alternative allocation requests implementation. | |
| 13:47:28 | rfolco | cdent, no? :) | |
| 13:47:33 | lyarwood | mriedem / artom_ ; what on earth, that was a webui cherry pick as it had recently been modified, I assumed gerrit wouldn't allow you to do something like this but nvm... | |
| 13:47:49 | cdent | rfolco: as in: no need to thank me, you're the one doing the hard work here | |
| 13:48:31 | rfolco | cdent, heh thank you for the patience and guidance on placement api stuff. | |
| 13:55:11 | edleafe | Scheduler subteam meeting in 5 minutes in #openstack-meeting-alt | |
| 13:55:34 | openstackgerrit | Matt Wisch proposed openstack/nova master: conf: Corrected compute_monitors and non_inheritable_image_properties help text https://review.openstack.org/468538 | |
| 14:01:02 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: explain payload inheritance in notification devref https://review.openstack.org/453667 | |
| 14:01:02 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Add snapshot id to the snapshot notifications https://review.openstack.org/453077 | |
| 14:03:19 | dansmith | mriedem: that graceful pass was hiding 17 tests that didn't know about BuildRequest | |
| 14:05:42 | mriedem | dansmith: in the scheduler meeting, but i'm going to have to parse your replies in there | |
| 14:08:46 | sfinucan | jaypipes: Quick q: do online migrations need a corresponding upgrade reno? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469147/ | |
| 14:09:07 | jaypipes | sfinucan: I don't think so... mriedem? ^ | |
| 14:09:38 | mriedem | not really if it's all internal state changery - people are expected to run online data migrations each upgrade | |
| 14:09:57 | openstackgerrit | Rafael Folco proposed openstack/nova master: [placement] Increase test coverage https://review.openstack.org/473479 | |
| 14:32:33 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Remove old service version check for mitaka https://review.openstack.org/472395 | |
| 14:40:15 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Add key_name field to InstancePayload https://review.openstack.org/463002 | |
| 14:41:19 | hferenc | hi all | |
| 14:41:25 | hferenc | just one small thing | |
| 14:41:35 | hferenc | can someone please put this patch into his/her review queue? | |
| 14:41:40 | hferenc | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/464002/ | |
| 14:41:41 | cdent | jaypipes: I didn't get a chance in the meeting to respond on the pushing wips or debate on spec first: i say go ahead and push wips as long as we're all flexible enough to tolerate some change | |
| 14:42:13 | alex_xu | jaypipes: the traits integration you mentioned is that the GET /allocation_requests support traits? | |
| 14:43:18 | mriedem | dansmith: ok want to talk about https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472395/2/nova/conductor/manager.py@484 ? | |
| 14:43:34 | mriedem | er | |
| 14:43:35 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472395/2/nova/conductor/manager.py@a487 | |
| 14:43:45 | dansmith | mriedem: see my update? | |
| 14:44:06 | dansmith | mriedem: you're right, we should always raise there now, | |
| 14:44:21 | dansmith | and we were covering up some legacy tests with that, including one checking specifically for "old api" nodes | |
| 14:45:44 | jaypipes | alex_xu: yes, but also the integration of traits into flavors... | |
| 14:46:05 | alex_xu | jaypipes: cool, ++ for that :) | |
| 14:49:07 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Add BDM to InstancePayload https://review.openstack.org/448779 | |
| 14:50:12 | mriedem | dansmith: did you see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472395/2//COMMIT_MSG@9 ? | |
| 14:50:34 | mriedem | i think it's checking for newton api, not liberty | |
| 14:51:08 | dansmith | mriedem: I didn't, but I looked up the history, let me go check | |
| 14:54:03 | sdague | dansmith: can you look at this - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/466658 - because you were on the original patch | |
| 14:54:13 | dansmith | mriedem: it's checking for >=12, which means 11 is the one it is concerned about | |
| 14:54:31 | dansmith | mriedem: 11 was 86a80062 | |
| 14:55:12 | dansmith | which added compute rpc 4.12, which was "early newton" I guess | |
| 14:55:16 | dansmith | but not final | |
| 14:56:02 | mriedem | service version 11 was newton https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287997/ | |
| 14:56:12 | rmk | Someone pasted code with a comment from me in it. What did I break this time? :( | |
| 14:56:21 | mriedem | anyway, that's not how i read the commit message | |
| 14:56:23 | dansmith | mriedem: it was during newton, notfinal newton | |
| 14:56:35 | mriedem | dansmith: that change is in stable/newton | |
| 14:56:37 | dansmith | mriedem: but yes, I think it needs to be "newton checking for mitaka api" | |
| 14:56:47 | dansmith | mriedem: yes, I know | |
| 14:56:52 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.resize_prep notification https://review.openstack.org/465081 | |
| 14:57:32 | dansmith | mriedem: the title is "check for mitaka" so I think I got that right and then just wrote the rest of the commit message later and was off by one | |
| 14:57:48 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: is the intenet to model traits request as an extention fo the flavor extra spec or will a new mechanisume be introduced to model this | |
| 14:58:00 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Remove old service version check for mitaka https://review.openstack.org/472395 | |
| 14:58:28 | mriedem | dansmith: ok maybe it's the "removes a service version check from mitaka" - the "from mitaka" makes me think the check was added in mitaka, which it wasn't, it was added in newton | |
| 14:58:43 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: new mech, eventually to replace extra specs would be my intent. not sure if folks agree with that though :) | |
| 14:58:43 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: e.g. can i request a traint say ssd on the nova boot command or would that be part of the flavor extra specs/image meta-data | |
| 14:58:57 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: that would be my preference | |
| 14:59:03 | dansmith | mriedem: it's "for mitaka" not "from mitaka" | |
| 14:59:23 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: I'd like to see a nova boot --required HW_CPU_X86_SSE42,STORAGE_DISK_SSD type of interface. | |
| 14:59:23 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: it means we can specify this per instance but the adming migh wat to impose constriant via flavors | |
| 14:59:40 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: but until that happens, we will need to tack everything on to a flavor. | |
| 14:59:52 | mriedem | dansmith: i know, hence my confusion :) | |
| 15:00:11 | dansmith | ...okay | |
| 15:00:52 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: --required HW_CPU_X86_SSE42,STORAGE_DISK_SSD is something i think in the long run would be nice to have. i dont know if we need to have a white list of traints that can be request per flavor though for billing reasons | |
| 15:02:02 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. cheap flavor cannont request STORAGE_DISK_SSD but performance flavor can. that list of trait could be modeled at the flvor level as allowed traits | |
| 15:02:18 | mriedem | dansmith: oh you're talking about the title, i was talking about the wording in the body in the old patch set | |
| 15:02:32 | dansmith | mriedem: correct | |
| 15:02:55 | mriedem | last thing is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472395/4//COMMIT_MSG | |
| 15:03:56 | mriedem | if this is going to cause a head to explode we can just stop talking about it | |
| 15:05:35 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: if i rember correctly you were also proposing haveing a --prefer or somthing similar for soft reqruiment or nice to have fetaure (traits) also. is that still what you envision | |
| 15:05:58 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: yes, but long way out. | |
| 15:06:43 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes: cool just checking, that would allow me to expres somting like --required HW_CPU_X86_SSE42 --prefer HW_CPU_X86_AVX cleanly | |
| 15:07:13 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Use plain routes list for os-server-groups endpoint instead of stevedore https://review.openstack.org/462169 | |
| 15:07:14 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Use plain routes list for os-consoles, os-console-auth-tokens endpoint instead of stevedore https://review.openstack.org/462175 | |
| 15:07:14 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Use plain routes list for user_data instead of stevedore https://review.openstack.org/462183 | |
| 15:07:15 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Use plain routes list for block_device_mapping instead of stevedore https://review.openstack.org/462180 | |
| 15:07:42 | sean-k-mooney | that is useful for tings like dpdk that require sse3+ to function but perform best with avx. | |
| 15:08:44 | sfinucan | Kevin_Zheng: Rebased above patches to put them in series ^^^ | |
| 15:08:58 | sfinucan | If we don't do that, we get endless merge conflicts :( | |
| 15:09:36 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: right. | |
| 15:09:58 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: not sure how people bill that, people pay a price of avx, but may not get avx. or people pay a price for sse3, but maybe they get some luck | |
| 15:11:03 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: i would guest the get billed by the minium gurantee but it would be up to the operator | |