| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-07-03 | |||
| 15:27:32 | sean-k-mooney | ok cool | |
| 15:28:19 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: i don't actually know what the use case is, | |
| 15:28:28 | mriedem | but nested RPs might be an option, it did come up too for BM | |
| 15:28:37 | mriedem | but not for multi-node chassis, | |
| 15:28:50 | mriedem | more for modeling NICs and Disks | |
| 15:29:02 | mriedem | and putting traits on those like type and capabilities | |
| 15:29:35 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: i think blade servers are a good candiated for nested resouce providers as anti afinity at the chassis level may be needed to ha reasons | |
| 15:31:33 | mriedem | yes that was one example that came up too | |
| 15:31:55 | mriedem | making sure you're not in the same rack as the other servers in the same group | |
| 15:32:51 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: that could be modeled with aggregates too but i guess it just depends on what you are trying to achive. | |
| 15:33:07 | mriedem | we got talking about the distance stuff from the boston session which then goes down the road of do we standarize the distance enums? or do we leave that up to ops (which wouldn't be interoperable)? or do you define it at an SLA level, but is your SLA guaranteed within the same rack, row or DC? | |
| 15:34:57 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: ceph stiks a resonably good blance there. they provide standard values in the crush map for osd,host,rack... but you can just change the vaule if you want too. | |
| 15:36:25 | sean-k-mooney | for example if you want to add a lay for chassis in between host and rack you can by editing the crushmap, honestly i dont know whay the best aproch would be but have a predifed set would be good for interop | |
| 15:42:12 | mdbooth | sfinucan: Here's a fun patch if you've got time: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462521/ . It has 2 dependencies which are stacked above it. | |
| 15:43:19 | mdbooth | The idea is to automatically kick off a revert if it fails on the destination. It's a bit tricky basically because of instance state, migration state, and quotas. | |
| 15:44:06 | mdbooth | It's obviously a user-friendly feature, but it's actually intended as a workaround for a bug we can't easily fix right now due to our datamodel. | |
| 15:45:41 | mdbooth | Bug details are in the bug link, but basically if your resize fails on the destination node, your instance is using a deleted glance image, and you don't revert within 24 hours, it'll delete the only remaining copy of your image. At this point your instance is unrecoverable. | |
| 15:46:53 | mdbooth | Ideally we would have the image cache not delete the image in this case, but our datamodel means it's not possible to identify an instance which is awaiting confirmation on the destination. | |
| 15:47:51 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Transform instance.resize_prep notification https://review.openstack.org/465081 | |
| 15:49:15 | AJaeger | mriedem, or any cores around? | |
| 15:49:34 | AJaeger | Could you please abandon this change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479657/ - it will never build and is wrong | |
| 15:49:38 | AJaeger | Hangs currently in zuul... | |
| 15:50:21 | mriedem | AJaeger: i don't see the abandon button | |
| 15:50:33 | AJaeger | ok, then I'll ask infra-root... | |
| 15:51:38 | fungi | that's a fun one | |
| 15:51:40 | fungi | looking now | |
| 15:52:21 | AJaeger | fungi, you're everywhere ;) Ignore my ping on #openstack-infra then :-) - and thanks | |
| 15:55:39 | fungi | okay, abandoned | |
| 15:56:04 | AJaeger | thanks | |
| 16:00:29 | sfinucan | mdbooth: Ooh, that's a tricky one | |
| 16:00:33 | sfinucan | Thanks for the context | |
| 16:04:08 | mriedem | melwitt: do you know if james is also serving VMs in his cloud or just baremetal? | |
| 16:06:13 | bauzas | mriedem: AFAIK, mel is on patriotic PTO today | |
| 16:06:44 | openstackgerrit | Andrey Kurilin proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: DO NOT MERGE: debug failed test https://review.openstack.org/479818 | |
| 16:08:05 | jaypipes | bauzas: responded. | |
| 16:08:10 | mriedem | bauzas: ok | |
| 16:08:18 | jaypipes | bauzas: there's no hurry on the n-r-p series, though. | |
| 16:08:28 | jaypipes | bauzas: allocation candidates is the more important one at this point. | |
| 16:08:32 | bauzas | jaypipes: I know, but I think your change is fine by me | |
| 16:08:35 | bauzas | jaypipes: sure | |
| 16:08:42 | mriedem | bauzas: can you go over this one? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/476631/15 | |
| 16:08:55 | mriedem | is dan out today too? | |
| 16:09:02 | mriedem | i.e. is today a red hat holiday? | |
| 16:09:10 | bauzas | mriedem: dan too | |
| 16:09:16 | bauzas | mriedem: dunno | |
| 16:09:26 | mriedem | most people make it a long weekend | |
| 16:09:30 | bauzas | mriedem: pssst, I'm not an US folk :p | |
| 16:09:34 | mriedem | really? | |
| 16:10:23 | bauzas | even if we have elephants having trumps, any of them are our president :p | |
| 16:10:39 | bauzas | anyway, looking at your change | |
| 16:11:36 | mriedem | our child care provider is closed today so i'm hosting a play date and working | |
| 16:12:11 | bauzas | heh | |
| 16:15:13 | openstackgerrit | Gábor Antal proposed openstack/nova master: Add json style checking for sample notifications https://review.openstack.org/443677 | |
| 16:31:47 | sfinucan | mdbooth: IMA I'm pretty confused by https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479802/ | |
| 16:32:48 | mdbooth | sfinucan: What specifically? | |
| 16:33:10 | sfinucan | I left comments in the review, but tl;dr why's the scope change necessary? | |
| 16:33:36 | sfinucan | The only functional change I can see is that you removed the status check | |
| 16:34:05 | mdbooth | sfinucan: Actually in that one specifically the benefit is marginal | |
| 16:35:02 | mdbooth | sfinucan: The change is that everything after the instance is 'done' is outside the scope of the context manager | |
| 16:35:14 | mdbooth | Although you could argue that quotas should be in... | |
| 16:35:25 | mdbooth | Yeah, that one could probably reasonably go | |
| 16:36:00 | mriedem | mgagne: let me know if you have any questions about the instance action thing i'm talking about in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/454322/ | |
| 16:36:02 | mdbooth | However, resize_instance is where it's at | |
| 16:36:39 | mdbooth | sfinucan: The issue in resize_instance is that you've cast the control flow to another host, but after that's happened you've still got this rogue context manager which might yet futz with your state | |
| 16:36:55 | mdbooth | There are no circumstances where you want that to happen | |
| 16:37:25 | sfinucan | mdbooth: wait, are you still referring to that patch or the next one in the series? | |
| 16:37:34 | mdbooth | sfinucan: The only you just posted | |
| 16:37:37 | mdbooth | errors_out_migration | |
| 16:38:04 | mdbooth | And that's directly relevant to the following patch, and why it's a dep | |
| 16:38:21 | sfinucan | ah, gotcha | |
| 16:38:26 | sfinucan | so 'finish_revert_resize' is the marginal change | |
| 16:38:37 | sfinucan | but 'resize_instance' is not | |
| 16:38:45 | mdbooth | Yeah, I could potentially ditch that bit of the diff | |
| 16:39:03 | sfinucan | yeah, you might drop that or at least split it. Just lets me reason about it a little easier | |
| 16:39:50 | mdbooth | The important one is resize_instance, because it does a cast | |
| 16:40:04 | mdbooth | So allowing the context to continue is a race | |
| 16:40:51 | sfinucan | mdbooth: You're referring to the call to finish_resize, yes? | |
| 16:40:58 | mdbooth | sfinucan: Yes | |
| 16:41:31 | sfinucan | OK, that clarifies things. Thanks for the explanation | |
| 16:41:52 | sfinucan | If you can split those out/drop the less necessary diffs, I'm good to sign off on that | |
| 16:43:43 | mdbooth | sfinucan: Thanks for looking at that. | |
| 16:43:49 | sfinucan | no problem at al | |
| 16:43:53 | sfinucan | *all | |
| 16:43:56 | sfinucan | *atal atal | |
| 16:44:17 | mdbooth | sfinucan: I've just quickly replied to 1 comment, btw. The scope change is actually related, even if it's not immediately obvious why. | |
| 16:44:55 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: pci: add uuid field to PciDevice object https://review.openstack.org/469147 | |
| 17:10:02 | claudiub | mriedem: hello. i have a question. so there is a patch that basically sanitizes the instance object in the InstanceMetadata ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/478991/3/nova/api/metadata/base.py ), which will get rid of the instance's context, which will make unset attributes no longer loadable. Do we have an alternative solution to this, rather than touching the lazy-loading attributes? | |
| 17:10:19 | claudiub | IMO, that can be very error-prone. | |
| 17:15:43 | mriedem | claudiub: i wasn't aware of that change, but i remember that we hit some issues with metadata api with multiple cells so fail to lazy-load correctly anyway; the commit message says this isn't the long-term strategic solution, | |
| 17:16:01 | mriedem | so i think long-term we want to whitelist what we store and cache | |
| 17:16:32 | mriedem | because we've had other bugs where we can't cache the instance object using things like memcache because it uses pickle and things in there don't pickle correctly, like the sqlalchemy db connection stored in the context, as noted in the commit message | |
| 17:16:50 | mriedem | yeah that's what the bug was, i remember this bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1694666 | |
| 17:16:50 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1694666 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "metadata service PicklingError: Can't pickle <class 'sqlalchemy.orm.session.Session'> when using memcached" [Medium,Fix released] - Assigned to Dan Smith (danms) | |
| 17:17:15 | claudiub | well, can't the db connection be recreated after the pickle? | |
| 17:18:26 | openstackgerrit | Claudiu Belu proposed openstack/nova master: Hyper-V: fix live migration with CSVs https://review.openstack.org/380448 | |
| 17:18:31 | mriedem | claudiub: maybe, probably depends on what that's needed for | |
| 17:18:52 | mriedem | claudiub: i'm assuming you guys have extra fields on the instance object for hyperv and you need to lazy-load stuff for the metadata api? | |
| 17:19:45 | claudiub | yeah, we need the device_metadata field when we create the instance config drive, but that's not really a niche field. it's a basic field needed for the config drive | |
| 17:20:49 | mriedem | hmm, have you talked to artom? | |
| 17:20:56 | mriedem | because i'd think libvirt needs the same thing | |