| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-08-01 | |||
| 01:07:35 | jaypipes | well these tests don't test ocata to pike, only pike to pike | |
| 01:07:38 | dansmith | pike to ocata I can kind of get on board with allowing to be leaky, but it's still not awesome | |
| 01:07:50 | dansmith | jaypipes: exactly, we must have _at least_ this much coverage, | |
| 01:07:59 | dansmith | and we really need one that simulates the pike/ocata split | |
| 01:08:38 | dansmith | we have the grenade multinode case, which helps, but it's not deterministic | |
| 01:08:49 | dansmith | and I think we've shown thus far, that if we don't lay down a test-driven approach to what we expect, | |
| 01:08:55 | jaypipes | I'm in a fix one thing, break ten others place right now :( | |
| 01:08:58 | dansmith | we're going to keep bouncing around between partial solutions | |
| 01:10:23 | dansmith | jaypipes: I'm not sure what the alternative is.. if I can write a test that shows that the code is broken if we end up running things in a particular sequence, that's a problem right? | |
| 01:11:21 | mriedem | we can possibly build on this to make one of the computes' service version be ocata | |
| 01:11:31 | mriedem | to test that code path in the change that checks the min service version | |
| 01:11:32 | jaypipes | dansmith: I'm not disagreeing with you that shit is broken. I just don't know how to fix this without breaking the happy path | |
| 01:11:44 | dansmith | mriedem: we have to simulate the ocata way of managing allocations too | |
| 01:11:46 | mriedem | plus we can do the single node resize to same host testing building on this | |
| 01:12:15 | dansmith | mriedem: i.e. the "always blow away everything without looking first" way | |
| 01:12:18 | mriedem | happy path is all computes are pike isn't it? | |
| 01:12:22 | dansmith | yes | |
| 01:12:27 | mriedem | which this tests | |
| 01:12:30 | dansmith | right | |
| 01:12:42 | jaypipes | no. happy path is non-move operations. | |
| 01:12:49 | dansmith | hah | |
| 01:12:56 | dansmith | that's the beer path | |
| 01:13:10 | mriedem | so, | |
| 01:13:26 | mriedem | what about bfv with shared storage resize to another az? | |
| 01:13:29 | mriedem | will THAT work?! | |
| 01:13:45 | jaypipes | not funny | |
| 01:13:48 | mriedem | uh mixed compute too | |
| 01:14:16 | mriedem | fine fine fine | |
| 01:14:19 | mriedem | s/resize/evacuate/ | |
| 01:14:23 | mriedem | happy? | |
| 01:15:35 | mriedem | so i think the tests as written are a same-version compute good representation of what we expect for confirm and revert, and before dan moved them from the top of the series of fixes, they were passing | |
| 01:15:45 | mriedem | so i think we get that baseline going, and then starting adding in test wrinkles | |
| 01:16:00 | mriedem | i think this is all easier once we have the tests written | |
| 01:16:21 | dansmith | mriedem: meaning they worked on top of the series, which means the series can work atop the tests, right? | |
| 01:16:30 | mriedem | yeah | |
| 01:16:39 | dansmith | that was my reason for doing that before rebasing, to make sure they could work with jay's set | |
| 01:16:49 | mriedem | just like how we do the functional regression bug testaroos | |
| 01:17:05 | dansmith | agreed, we *have* to get this baseline working, and then we can expand the base a bit | |
| 01:17:12 | dansmith | for things like single compute at least | |
| 01:17:31 | jaypipes | I don't disagree with you. | |
| 01:17:38 | jaypipes | just raging that's all. | |
| 01:17:43 | jaypipes | I'll figure it out eventually. | |
| 01:18:47 | mriedem | i'll go back to commenting up dan's cells docs patch :) | |
| 01:27:30 | jaypipes | dansmith: still here? | |
| 01:27:35 | dansmith | jaypipes: yeah | |
| 01:27:45 | jaypipes | dansmith: so this: | |
| 01:27:45 | jaypipes | 1136 compute_version = objects.Service.get_minimum_version( | |
| 01:27:46 | jaypipes | 1137 context, 'nova-compute') | |
| 01:27:46 | jaypipes | 1138 heal_allocations = False | |
| 01:27:46 | jaypipes | 1139 if compute_version < 22: | |
| 01:27:46 | jaypipes | 1140 heal_allocations = True | |
| 01:27:56 | jaypipes | is not working | |
| 01:28:09 | jaypipes | or at least, it's returning heal_allocations = True in the functional tests | |
| 01:28:27 | dansmith | jaypipes: are you using the allservicescurrent fixture? | |
| 01:28:28 | jaypipes | which is triggering the healing of allocations improperly. | |
| 01:28:36 | dansmith | otherwise you probably have a min ver of zero | |
| 01:28:38 | jaypipes | dansmith: sigh | |
| 01:28:47 | dansmith | jaypipes: mriedem pointed that out earlier | |
| 01:28:50 | jaypipes | you even told me about that earlier. | |
| 01:28:54 | jaypipes | yeah.. :( | |
| 01:28:56 | dansmith | yeah, sorry | |
| 01:39:57 | mriedem | dansmith: ok comments in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/487183/ for the cells docs - looks real purdy | |
| 01:40:06 | mriedem | you can tell me you'll look in the morning and i won't be hurt | |
| 01:40:31 | dansmith | mriedem: I'll look in the morning | |
| 01:41:59 | dansmith | but.. you said... | |
| 01:46:21 | jaypipes | dansmith: other_provider_uuid is the source host right? | |
| 01:46:40 | dansmith | jaypipes: it depends on which direction you're going | |
| 01:47:12 | dansmith | jaypipes: actually, it should always be target the way it's written I think | |
| 01:47:25 | dansmith | provider_uuid is instance[host] and other is the target right/ | |
| 01:47:26 | jaypipes | dansmith: ? if "host" is always the one you were originally scheduled to, then other is the one you're going *to*, right? | |
| 01:47:57 | jaypipes | yeah, ok | |
| 01:48:33 | jaypipes | dansmith: the only thing the "other direction" refers to isn't the direction but rather the order in which the hosts' update_available_resource() is called. | |
| 01:48:45 | jaypipes | I think? | |
| 01:48:46 | dansmith | no | |
| 01:48:54 | dansmith | we always call host1 first and host2 second | |
| 01:49:00 | dansmith | for the periodic | |
| 01:50:47 | mriedem | other_provider_uuid is the target | |
| 01:50:55 | dansmith | right | |
| 01:51:00 | dansmith | the destination host | |
| 01:51:06 | mriedem | we could rename to target or dest or whatever | |
| 01:51:13 | dansmith | yep | |
| 01:51:45 | jaypipes | I gotta look at this in the morning. I'm fried right now :( | |
| 01:52:06 | dansmith | jaypipes: you want me to convert it to source/dest so it's like that for you in the morning? | |
| 01:52:19 | jaypipes | dansmith: no. | |
| 01:52:35 | jaypipes | dansmith: I'll do it in the morning. will probably need to start from scratch with this last patch :( | |
| 01:52:44 | dansmith | okay | |
| 01:52:46 | jaypipes | too many friggin conditionals to keep in my head. | |
| 01:53:11 | jaypipes | are we in the update loop? are we on an ocata? are we removing? are we migrating to same host? | |
| 01:53:20 | jaypipes | all with the same fucking code paths. :( | |
| 01:53:28 | dansmith | well, this is why in hindsight, I think bolting this onto the RT was a bad move | |
| 01:53:33 | dansmith | too much baggage | |
| 01:54:32 | dansmith | jaypipes: anyway, go get your pug cuddles | |
| 02:00:01 | jaypipes | dansmith: I would have been happy to write all of this outside of the resource tracker, but you know... upgrades. | |
| 02:00:52 | openstackgerrit | Spencer Yu proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Nova client should retry with Retry-After value https://review.openstack.org/447766 | |
| 03:00:23 | openstackgerrit | Naichuan Sun proposed openstack/nova master: xenapi: Live migration failed in xapi pool https://review.openstack.org/489451 | |
| 04:53:57 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Fix test_get_volume_config method https://review.openstack.org/489467 | |
| 06:04:53 | openstackgerrit | Zhaokun Fu proposed openstack/nova master: Smaller disk flavor check https://review.openstack.org/489484 | |
| 06:10:22 | openstackgerrit | Michael Still proposed openstack/nova master: Avoid chowning console logs in libvirt https://review.openstack.org/472229 | |
| 06:10:23 | openstackgerrit | Michael Still proposed openstack/nova master: First attempt at adding a privsep user to nova itself. https://review.openstack.org/459166 | |
| 06:10:23 | openstackgerrit | Michael Still proposed openstack/nova master: Move execs of touch to privsep. https://review.openstack.org/489190 | |