| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-07-31 | |||
| 14:27:41 | bauzas | mriedem: and that's at least existing from stable/newton | |
| 14:27:50 | bauzas | it's not a regression at all | |
| 14:27:51 | dansmith | jaypipes: I was looking at your patch and I think we probably need a debug statement when we do the remove so we know it's happening | |
| 14:28:07 | dansmith | i.e. so we can check it in the tempest run logs | |
| 14:28:08 | jaypipes | dansmith: totes | |
| 14:28:17 | bauzas | mriedem: so we *could* update the port | |
| 14:28:33 | gibi_ | jaypipes: also the server_group test has VM moves like migrate and evacuate | |
| 14:28:38 | bauzas | mriedem: but that's just two roundtrips IMHO | |
| 14:28:59 | gibi_ | jaypipes: e.g. https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/functional/test_server_group.py#L367 | |
| 14:29:04 | cdent | jaypipes, dansmith, gibi_: what we don't have in those tests is any confirmation of the state of allocations | |
| 14:29:11 | bauzas | mriedem: since nova has SGs per instances, while neutron has per ports, it's a waste of HTTP calls IMHO | |
| 14:29:17 | cdent | and since we're probably not running at capacity it doesn't become an issue | |
| 14:30:08 | gibi_ | cdent: yes, I think the only test where we assert on capacity is the new one we are troubleshooting now | |
| 14:30:23 | dansmith | jaypipes: I don't see any "expected to find" logs in the multinode run, which would mean we were bailing out of that un-doubling | |
| 14:31:03 | mriedem | gibi_: i think cdent is talking about tempest dsvm runs | |
| 14:31:09 | mriedem | where we aren't using fake drivers | |
| 14:32:06 | dansmith | we wouldn't confirm allocations in a tempest job anyway | |
| 14:32:09 | gibi_ | ahh, then please disregard my comment | |
| 14:32:10 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Remove redundant free_vcpus logging in _report_hypervisor_resource_view https://review.openstack.org/487216 | |
| 14:32:31 | jaypipes | I'm going to add more log statements to the patch. give me a few minutes | |
| 14:32:36 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Remove unnecessary code https://review.openstack.org/488299 | |
| 14:32:40 | kashyap | lyarwood: I know you gave +2, but do you prefer me to remove the 'Conflicts' note in the upstream backport? | |
| 14:33:06 | lyarwood | kashyap: no it's fine, that's more of a supernit tbh | |
| 14:33:47 | kashyap | lyarwood: Yeah, no problem. I aim to please, so thought I'd check :-) | |
| 14:38:33 | jaypipes | cdent: gimme a few. pushing a new rev with more log statements. | |
| 14:38:47 | cdent | roger | |
| 14:38:58 | mdbooth | sdague: A while back mriedem asked for a functional test for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462521/ . Happy to oblige, but I'm not so familiar with what infra we already have in functional. Any pointers? | |
| 14:41:50 | mriedem | mdbooth: gibi has a 2 node resize functional test here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/487958/4 | |
| 14:42:03 | mdbooth | mriedem: Looking, thanks. | |
| 14:42:14 | bauzas | kudos to sdague | |
| 14:42:39 | bauzas | I looked today at launchpad and for the first time of my career, saw 0 new bugs | |
| 14:42:52 | mriedem | mdbooth: this one fakes out a resource claim failure on a compute https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/tests/functional/regressions/test_bug_1671648.py | |
| 14:43:10 | bauzas | I'm pretty impressed by his ability to triage bugs so fast :) | |
| 14:43:17 | bauzas | sdague: <3 | |
| 14:44:43 | mdbooth | mriedem: Should be able to find a good starting point there. Thanks! | |
| 14:46:12 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: don't allocate on compute nodes https://review.openstack.org/488595 | |
| 14:46:12 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: remove source provider allocs in confirm_resize() https://review.openstack.org/488510 | |
| 14:46:25 | jaypipes | cdent, gibi, dansmith, edleafe: ok, have at it. ^ | |
| 14:46:32 | cdent | ✔ | |
| 14:47:19 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Test resize with placement api https://review.openstack.org/487958 | |
| 14:52:16 | gibi_ | here is the full debug log with jaypipes new patch set http://paste.openstack.org/show/617024/ | |
| 14:52:59 | gibi_ | my copy paste buffer is too small | |
| 14:53:04 | gibi_ | disregard the above link | |
| 14:53:22 | jaypipes | gibi_: :) | |
| 14:53:27 | jaypipes | gibi_: I was gonna say... | |
| 14:54:38 | gibi_ | is there a limit on paste.openstack.org about the size of the log? | |
| 14:55:35 | clarkb | gibi_: yes its like 1MB or something. If you have to paste very large amounts of text I think gist.github.com allows large pastes anonymously | |
| 14:55:46 | gibi_ | clarkb: thanks | |
| 14:56:00 | gibi_ | it seems pastebin doesn't have such limit either | |
| 14:56:01 | gibi_ | https://pastebin.com/0DuaUrZJ | |
| 14:56:25 | sdague | mdbooth: looking | |
| 14:56:31 | sdague | bauzas: thanks! | |
| 14:57:08 | bauzas | I usually decrease by 5/6 bugs per day | |
| 14:57:22 | bauzas | given we had 120 new ones... | |
| 14:57:31 | bauzas | so, yeah, very impressive | |
| 14:58:17 | bauzas | mriedem: had a chance to qualify the pike-rc-candidates ? | |
| 14:58:20 | bauzas | I gave you 3 of those | |
| 14:58:33 | bauzas | mriedem: I can look over the rest | |
| 14:58:52 | dansmith | jaypipes: cool, that looks like it'll tell us what is happeing | |
| 14:59:23 | mriedem | bauzas: no | |
| 14:59:26 | jaypipes | dansmith: cool. FYI, bhagyashris is also functionally testing shared storage with NFS and the claims-in-scheduler patch. | |
| 14:59:35 | bauzas | mriedem: okay, will review those | |
| 14:59:50 | bauzas | also, I need to make sure we have the claims bugs in there ^ | |
| 15:00:23 | mriedem | i marked both claims bugs for rc | |
| 15:00:41 | openstackgerrit | Spencer Yu proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Nova client should retry with Retry-After value https://review.openstack.org/447766 | |
| 15:01:21 | mriedem | https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1707256 | |
| 15:01:21 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1707256 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Scheduler report client does not account for shared resource providers" [High,Confirmed] - Assigned to Jay Pipes (jaypipes) | |
| 15:01:25 | mriedem | https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1707252 | |
| 15:01:25 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1707252 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Claims in the scheduler does not account for doubling allocations on resize to same host" [Medium,Confirmed] | |
| 15:01:30 | bauzas | ack | |
| 15:01:31 | mriedem | are the 2 i created on friday | |
| 15:01:46 | gibi_ | jaypipes, dansmith, cdent: relevant part of the log is here http://paste.openstack.org/show/617028/ | |
| 15:04:11 | gibi_ | it seems that the code correctly sends the stripped allocations | |
| 15:04:46 | gibi_ | but after that PUT placement still has the old allocation as well | |
| 15:05:47 | gibi_ | does PUT /placement/allocations expected to totally overwrite the db for the instance | |
| 15:05:50 | gibi_ | ? | |
| 15:06:04 | melwitt | dansmith, mriedem: I have a fix up for a volume detach data corruption bug at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/488545/ that was caused by an earlier attempt to fix a different bug. has to be backported all the way to newton I think | |
| 15:06:05 | mriedem | yes | |
| 15:06:07 | mriedem | gibi_: yes | |
| 15:06:49 | mriedem | melwitt: good lord | |
| 15:07:05 | mriedem | i don't think the backports to newton ever landed because i also depended on them for another series | |
| 15:07:23 | melwitt | o rly | |
| 15:07:33 | mriedem | oh nvm https://review.openstack.org/#/c/425114/ | |
| 15:07:38 | mriedem | must be something else then | |
| 15:07:56 | cdent | gibi_: is there yet another PUT after the stripped one? | |
| 15:07:59 | mriedem | i was thinking of this series i have in newton https://review.openstack.org/#/c/470347/ | |
| 15:08:05 | mriedem | to wait for an interface to be detached | |
| 15:08:15 | melwitt | oh, okay | |
| 15:08:39 | cdent | gibi_: or is maybe the one with the stripped not being accepted (because of 409)? | |
| 15:09:57 | gibi_ | cdent: look at line 5-7 in http://paste.openstack.org/show/617028/ | |
| 15:10:07 | cdent | yeah, I'm there now | |
| 15:10:07 | gibi_ | cdent: sorry 4-7 | |
| 15:10:19 | gibi_ | cdent: 4 sends an allocation list with one item | |
| 15:10:52 | gibi_ | but line 6 writes two allocations to the db | |
| 15:12:01 | gibi_ | cdent: not two, three actually | |
| 15:12:12 | mriedem | melwitt: i think i was thinking of this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/441204/ | |
| 15:12:16 | mriedem | which is part of that newton series | |
| 15:12:20 | mriedem | and sounds similar to what you're doing | |
| 15:12:22 | gibi_ | cdent: but all for the same provider so this is not the problem | |
| 15:13:10 | cdent | gibi_: right, what you are seeing there is just an artifact of the object: an REST-level allocation is made up of multiple Allocation Objects | |