Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-07-12
22:55:40 mriedem so to recheck, we'd have to (1) check, (2) change state, (3) recheck, (4) cast
22:55:48 melwitt yes
22:56:07 mriedem and older computes are setting the vm state to ACTIVE but that shouldn't cause a problem
22:56:17 mriedem if the api did it i mean
22:56:52 mriedem it's a bit of a lie though...for example, if we set the state to ACTIVE, counted, and then cast to compute, but the rpc message never got there
22:57:03 mriedem we'd say the instance is active even though the guest is dead
22:57:19 melwitt oh yeah. maybe it could be a problem if an old compute goes to set SOFT_DELETED and it's already SOFT_DELETED (if it expected a different vm_state)
22:57:45 mriedem i think vm_state is ok,
22:58:03 mriedem you can set that to ACTIVE twice and it's fine
22:58:03 mriedem the problem is task_state
22:58:03 mriedem instance.save(expected_task_state=[task_states.SOFT_DELETING])
22:58:13 mriedem and setting vm_state=ACTIVE while task_state is SOFT_DELETING is a problem,
22:58:13 melwitt oh, guh sorry getting it backward. restore sets to active
22:58:15 mriedem because when an instance is ACTIVE it's task_state is supposed to be None
22:58:19 mriedem right
22:59:06 mriedem you would almost have to temporarily change the state to active for the recheck, and then set the vm_state back to SOFT_DELETED for the cast to the compute - which makes me barf a little
22:59:11 melwitt yeah. that would suck to call it active if RPC message lost
22:59:35 melwitt lemme see
23:00:15 mriedem melwitt: btw, let me hand you a power pack of good will for sticking with this, because this makes my brain bleed
23:00:18 melwitt okay yeah there's no in between vm_state of RESTORING. that was a task_state
23:02:09 melwitt mriedem: heh ... thanks. I felt like a burned out husk for quite a time. props to you and those who have braved reviewing it. I kind of cringed every time I asked someone to review it
23:04:36 melwitt mriedem: these state changes in the API change deleted_at to None. and I guess I had been thinking to just punt this and assume parallel restores are not really a thing in real life
23:06:08 melwitt maybe I could add a filter to count RESTORING as usage too and do handle the recheck that way. I dunno
23:07:28 mriedem ha
23:07:32 mriedem instance.deleted_at = None
23:07:37 mriedem right in front of my gd eyes
23:08:01 melwitt mine too. and I still didn't see it until like the fourth time I looked at it
23:15:40 mriedem melwitt: so,
23:15:46 mriedem re the hw video ram thing,
23:15:54 mriedem we might want to just burn that turd out of the api before your series
23:16:01 dansmith +10,000,000
23:16:05 melwitt lol
23:16:06 mriedem it was added back in icehouse https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/libvirt-video-driver-selection
23:16:12 dansmith going over that just now, that's nutsypants mcgee
23:16:20 mriedem and is the only special virt-driver specific extra spec accounted against quota in the api
23:16:39 melwitt well, that makes me feel bad for the person who has been trying to fix those video ram quota bugs
23:16:54 melwitt but yeah, I was thinking to at least start off with no video ram
23:16:55 mriedem well, they fixed something that was screwing up their quota
23:17:00 melwitt yes
23:17:04 mriedem if we don't count it against usage in the first place, that's not a problem
23:17:12 melwitt yeah, that's what I was thinking
23:17:40 melwitt if anything they'll get more out of their quota if we don't count it :P
23:18:32 mriedem well, it's not like there aren't other things we don't account for in quota, which are calculated as overheads in the virt driver
23:18:37 mriedem this could potentially move there for the RT claim stuff
23:18:41 mriedem or wherever
23:18:43 melwitt yeah
23:18:53 melwitt fine by me. makes my life easier too
23:19:11 mriedem i'll probably poke the ops list first to be safe
23:19:20 mriedem dansmith: agree i assume? ^
23:19:49 dansmith mriedem: I'd rather you not but whatever
23:19:56 mriedem so sneaky remove?
23:20:07 dansmith bugfix, imho
23:20:36 melwitt yeah. the bug where video ram usage wasn't ever decremented, that was a bug from whenever the feature was added to ... like last month
23:20:50 melwitt so I'm guessing around 5 years at least
23:20:59 dansmith dat bug yo
23:21:08 melwitt I assume people can't have cared about it too much
23:21:31 dansmith only people with video ram called out too
23:22:57 mriedem https://review.openstack.org/#/c/456050/
23:23:02 mriedem was the recent fix
23:23:51 dansmith rage quit!
23:24:03 melwitt lol
23:24:05 mriedem ok so maybe i just remove it and mark it related to that bug, and bug 1704012 and the counting quotas series
23:24:06 openstack bug 1704012 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "hw_video:ram_max_mb is tracked for quota but not compute node resource provider allocations" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1704012
23:24:22 melwitt I do that so often. open a link from the chat window and try to close the browser tab and close the channel tab
23:24:51 melwitt (with ctrl w)
23:25:31 dansmith melwitt: it wasn't even mentioned in the commit message, nor was the quota bit tested specifically, AFAICT
23:25:42 dansmith er, mriedem ^
23:27:26 mriedem so,
23:27:38 mriedem can my commit message to remove it just say, "hey, what's that behind you!"
23:27:53 melwitt lol
23:28:32 mriedem melwitt: you want me to do it and you rebase on top or you just handle it?
23:28:57 melwitt mriedem: yeah, you can do it
23:29:00 mriedem ok
23:29:41 dansmith mriedem: yes, yes it can
23:29:48 melwitt you can have that glory
23:30:02 melwitt I'm still trying to think about multi create
23:39:15 melwitt mriedem: yeah, I think you're right about the multi create thing. in compute/api, we're in the place where we haven't yet returned anything to the user. so if we bail with OverQuota, there should be no instances left that were created as a result of the request
23:39:33 melwitt it should be as if it never happend
23:39:53 mriedem slide of hand
23:39:55 mriedem *slight
23:40:03 melwitt looks like would have to clean up request specs and build requests too.
23:40:12 mriedem yeah
23:40:19 mriedem similar issue in conductor
23:40:24 melwitt yeah
23:56:00 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Stop counting hw_video:ram_max_mb against quota https://review.openstack.org/483133
23:56:01 mriedem dansmith: melwitt: ^
23:59:38 melwitt mriedem: cool
23:59:46 melwitt also, I think I finished replying to your other comments
#openstack-nova - 2017-07-13
00:00:11 mriedem yup
00:00:24 melwitt k.
00:00:41 melwitt think I gonna try to go outdoors now
00:01:35 mriedem i'm going to go berate my family for awhile
00:02:15 melwitt heh
00:06:27 mriedem alex_xu: when you're around, i've got the novaclient change up for the 2.50 microversion but a todo question in there about how we want to handle the python api if at all https://review.openstack.org/#/c/483060/3/novaclient/v2/quota_classes.py
00:06:43 mriedem otherwise the functional tests i added for the cli are all passing, so i'd just need to remove the WIP from the commit message
00:48:32 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Enable cold migration with target host(1/2) https://review.openstack.org/408955
00:49:00 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Enable cold migration with target host(2/2) https://review.openstack.org/408964
00:49:35 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: api-ref: Add parameters in cold migrate action https://review.openstack.org/410042
00:50:08 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Add functional tests for cold migration to same host https://review.openstack.org/414926
00:54:06 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Trivial: Remove unnecessary format specifier https://review.openstack.org/481574

Earlier   Later