| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-08-08 | |||
| 12:14:48 | bauzas | gibi: mmm, sadly then | |
| 12:21:17 | gibi | bauzas: so are you OK with the SmallFakeDriver vcpu=2 change? | |
| 12:21:24 | bauzas | gibi: looking | |
| 12:23:39 | bauzas | gibi: just reviewing alex_xu and then it's your turn :p | |
| 12:25:57 | gibi | bauzas: OK, thanks | |
| 12:28:53 | openstackgerrit | Alexandra Settle proposed openstack/nova master: Create reference subpage https://review.openstack.org/490994 | |
| 12:29:21 | bauzas | cdent: gibi: so, question about max_unit | |
| 12:29:47 | bauzas | cdent: gibi: when we have a flavor asking for 10 CPUs, do you think it should be 10 pCPUs or 10 vCPUs ? | |
| 12:30:01 | bauzas | cdent: gibi: MHO is that's for virtual ones | |
| 12:30:02 | asettle | Ah shite, sdague and stephenfin - I got ahead of myself and updated the wrong nova patch (didn't tab to the right PR). I just updated this patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/490994/ with the change from Administrators to Adminstration Guide | |
| 12:30:04 | asettle | I can revert if you'd like? | |
| 12:30:14 | cdent | bauzas: it _is_ for vcpus | |
| 12:30:18 | asettle | Otherwise, I was just going to make the same change on stephenfin 's patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/490952/ | |
| 12:30:21 | bauzas | cdent: I know | |
| 12:30:30 | cdent | and it should be | |
| 12:30:41 | bauzas | cdent: gibi: but the point is then, why max_unit should be about *physical* resources ? | |
| 12:31:56 | cdent | max_unit, in general, is abstract. where we make concrete assertions about its meaning is when we set inventory from the compute manager. In there we make the assertion that it is bad for a service to host a _single_ vm that has more vcpus than there are pcpus | |
| 12:32:34 | cdent | when we discussed this before, several people mentioned that doing so would cause pathalogical context switching | |
| 12:32:44 | bauzas | cdent: tbc, flavor * ratio should be <= max_unit | |
| 12:33:16 | bauzas | not sure I understand the problem about max_unit being related to physical resources :( | |
| 12:33:16 | cdent | ratio has _nothing_ to do with max unit. ratio is a measurement for all all guests, max_unit is for one | |
| 12:33:37 | bauzas | cdent: sure, I know | |
| 12:34:09 | cdent | bauzas: okay, so I dont understand what you’re asking or suggesting then? | |
| 12:34:16 | sdague | asettle: don't work, I've got a patch sitting on top of it that I'm about to push and it should zero it back | |
| 12:34:31 | asettle | sdague: dont work? | |
| 12:34:37 | cdent | asettle: woot. you never need to work again! | |
| 12:34:44 | asettle | cdent: I have seriously been waiting for this day for ages. | |
| 12:34:49 | bauzas | cdent: the problem is that max_unit is blocking us for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/491529/4/nova/virt/fake.py@599 | |
| 12:34:57 | sdague | asettle: don't worry | |
| 12:35:14 | asettle | sdague: hahaha okay :) | |
| 12:35:14 | cdent | bauzas: yes, in a way we want and expect it to. so either we change the fake driver or use a different one. | |
| 12:35:30 | asettle | I will go make my two second patch on stephenfin 's then | |
| 12:35:52 | bauzas | cdent: I'm unclear, why should we need to modify the resources if we have a ratio around 16.0 ? | |
| 12:36:08 | bauzas | cdent: because of max_unit, because max_unit == pCPUs, right? | |
| 12:36:30 | bauzas | that ^ looks weird to me, and changing the behaviour we had for 5 years | |
| 12:36:37 | cdent | because we are creating an allocation, when we do the doubling, for a single consumer that is greater than max_unit | |
| 12:36:49 | cdent | the change in behavior is the doubling | |
| 12:36:53 | cdent | that’s what’s new | |
| 12:37:01 | cdent | the max_unit behavior has been around for a while | |
| 12:37:13 | bauzas | imagine a world where we would double the allocation, but have the previous behaviour | |
| 12:37:23 | cdent | if we were able to do the doubling with two different consumer uuids, we wouldnt have this problem | |
| 12:37:45 | bauzas | say I have a single pCPU with 16.0 ratio, I can still ask for 2 flavors of 1vCPU, right? | |
| 12:37:53 | cdent | bauzas: yes | |
| 12:38:05 | bauzas | so, why can't we do that now ? | |
| 12:38:06 | cdent | but that’s not what is being asked for here | |
| 12:38:21 | cdent | we are literally asking for a single consumption with 2vcpu | |
| 12:38:22 | jaypipes | morning folks | |
| 12:38:50 | bauzas | cdent: if we have a ratio of 16.0, I don't think it's a problem | |
| 12:39:04 | cdent | morning jaypipes: i hope your potty emergency is cleared up | |
| 12:39:15 | openstackgerrit | Sean Dague proposed openstack/nova master: Create For End Users index section https://review.openstack.org/491785 | |
| 12:39:17 | bauzas | cdent: in a previous world, I could ask for one flavor of 2vCPUs with a single compute having 1pCPU | |
| 12:39:18 | jaypipes | dansmith, cdent, bauzas: just FYI, I'm down to two test failures left on the confirm/resize patch series... | |
| 12:39:27 | jaypipes | cdent: seems to be, yes. | |
| 12:39:33 | sdague | asettle: ah, I guess it doesn't overwrite it, however it should be fine | |
| 12:39:46 | asettle | sdague: okay :) that's not so bad. Just a wording nit anyway. | |
| 12:40:09 | bauzas | jaypipes: dansmith: cdent: gibi: FWIW, I'll need to be on PTO tomorrow (only) btw. | |
| 12:40:19 | jaypipes | bauzas: noted | |
| 12:40:19 | cdent | bauzas: well clearly we do have a problem because stuff is broken: we cannot write the allocations we want to write. we can either not do the doubling or we can break the way max_unit works, or we can just use a bigger fake driver. neither of the two first options are worth doing at this time | |
| 12:40:21 | asettle | Also stephenfin I have another file you need to move with the admin guide patch | |
| 12:40:25 | bauzas | and then, I'll have my summer vacations starting next week for 2.5 weeks | |
| 12:40:34 | asettle | Oh wait, nvm, you've already done it! | |
| 12:40:46 | openstackgerrit | Sean Dague proposed openstack/nova master: Create For End Users index section https://review.openstack.org/491785 | |
| 12:41:01 | bauzas | jaypipes: dansmith: cdent: gibi: Monday 14th Aug. to 30th Aug. incl. | |
| 12:41:17 | bauzas | I'm telling you because it was a problem for June | |
| 12:41:23 | bauzas | knowing when I was around | |
| 12:42:48 | jaypipes | bauzas: k. thx for the heads up! | |
| 12:48:17 | stephenfin | jaypipes: Any chance I could get eyes on this today (before I head off for another week)? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453808 | |
| 12:48:56 | stephenfin | Ignore the bp topic - that's just to link it. It's actually a prerequisite for that bp which I hope to work on next cycle | |
| 12:52:14 | jaypipes | stephenfin: done | |
| 12:52:36 | stephenfin | jaypipes: Shound | |
| 12:53:02 | jaypipes | stephenfin: is that a type of dog that hangs out in libraries? | |
| 12:53:49 | jaypipes | so has gibi come up with a bug of the day yet in placement? :) | |
| 12:54:03 | stephenfin | jaypipes: :D No, it's the rural Irish equivalent of "thank you" | |
| 12:54:17 | jaypipes | stephenfin: :) good to know! | |
| 12:54:49 | jaypipes | stephenfin: how is that pronounced? | |
| 12:55:37 | stephenfin | "Want to sound like a true Irishman? Use 'Sh' instead of 'S' for literally every word you encounter. Tashty shtuff" | |
| 12:56:54 | jaypipes | heh | |
| 13:00:31 | gibi | jaypipes: not yet. I'm making myself busy with the removal of change scheduler from the func test and the fix for the resize to too big flavor bug | |
| 13:00:45 | jaypipes | gibi: almost done with review on that | |
| 13:04:31 | bhagyashris | jaypipes, melwitt, dansmitt: Hi, | |
| 13:05:02 | jaypipes | bhagyashris: we're still working on fixing bugs around shared resources. it doesn't look like Pike will include proper support for shared disk :( | |
| 13:05:03 | alex_xu | jaypipes: a easy one https://review.openstack.org/#/c/489205/ for a bug of traits api | |
| 13:05:51 | bhagyashris | jaypipes: ok. I just wanted to ask related to the bfv | |
| 13:06:29 | bhagyashris | jaypipes, melwitt, dansmith: Why we are spending less attention to these patches[1][2]? [1]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428481/ [2]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428505 | |
| 13:06:29 | bhagyashris | I believe bfv case is handle at the placement side properly so Is it necessity of [1][2] | |
| 13:06:35 | stephenfin | asettle: To which file do you refer "As I said earlier, only major qualm is changing it to Administration Guide rather than Administrators." https://review.openstack.org/#/c/490952/ | |
| 13:06:39 | stephenfin | ? | |
| 13:06:54 | asettle | stephenfin: no file there. I was talking about the build. I was going to pull it down, and edit the index file. | |
| 13:06:55 | stephenfin | I need to rework that to include some more changes, so I might as well change it here | |
| 13:06:58 | stephenfin | Ahgg | |
| 13:06:59 | asettle | But then I got confused, and edited sdague 's patch | |
| 13:06:59 | stephenfin | *ahh | |
| 13:07:09 | asettle | So, I fixed it, but in sdague 's patch, and not yours :) | |
| 13:07:13 | asettle | So, do nothing there :P | |
| 13:07:17 | asettle | I hope not | |
| 13:07:24 | stephenfin | ok then :) | |
| 13:08:29 | jaypipes | bhagyashris: we've been trying to increase functional test case coverage of resource accounting over the last couple weeks, focusing on move operations (resize, migrate, evacuate, etc). | |
| 13:08:50 | jaypipes | bhagyashris: I'd be keen to look at those patches for Pike, but they need a rebase. | |
| 13:09:04 | jaypipes | bhagyashris: are you interested in rebasing them? | |
| 13:12:43 | jaypipes | alex_xu: done | |