| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-08-08 | |||
| 15:55:56 | stephenfin | and I was pretty sure the plan was to still have central "Admin guide" and "Install guide" pages that deep link into each folder | |
| 15:56:02 | stephenfin | sdague: True | |
| 15:56:23 | bauzas | jaypipes: cdent: gibi: I clarified my opinion in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/491529/5/nova/tests/functional/integrated_helpers.py@75 about using all the filters | |
| 15:56:31 | stephenfin | Documentation is hard work. | |
| 15:56:35 | sdague | stephenfin: for sure | |
| 15:56:48 | bauzas | jaypipes: cdent: gibi: I'm okay with using all of them by default, just not in the same change, that's it | |
| 15:57:06 | sdague | stephenfin: it's possible we get there, there is so much near duplication of content from these different sources though, it's going to take a lot of massaging to figure it out | |
| 15:57:09 | asettle | stephenfin sdague - I'm going to print screen that you two are both agreeing that docs are hard work and cherish that forever | |
| 15:57:22 | asettle | Do you know how many times I've heard that docs aren't necessary and my job is worthless :D | |
| 15:58:21 | sdague | asettle: zomg, that's terrible. | |
| 15:58:46 | cfriesen | asettle: anyone making such a statement is obviously not worth listening to. | |
| 15:58:54 | asettle | *shrug* it is what it is :) | |
| 15:59:02 | asettle | cfriesen: in a nutshell ;0 | |
| 15:59:04 | asettle | ;) * | |
| 15:59:19 | asettle | My favourite argument is that their code is so pure no docs are required for it's beauty | |
| 15:59:30 | asettle | Because 'you should just be able to read the code' ;) | |
| 15:59:45 | cfriesen | having written pure and beautiful code and then gone back 5 years later..... | |
| 16:00:39 | asettle | hahahhahaha | |
| 16:01:28 | sean-k-mooney | asettle: cfriesen that argument may fly for perl. i here its considered a write only language so need to read it again 5 years later :P | |
| 16:02:10 | asettle | stephenfin: uhhhhh who wrote that? :P did we? | |
| 16:02:18 | asettle | sean-k-mooney: pretty much goes for all code, no? | |
| 16:02:20 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: that is when you use qemu without kvm/xen i think | |
| 16:02:57 | sfinucan | sean-k-mooney: Doesn't look like it http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/ | |
| 16:03:14 | sean-k-mooney | asettle: there is some code that is self documenting and it you coreccletly decompose your codded into small fuctions it can be but ingererall comment help alot | |
| 16:03:17 | sdague | sfinucan: it's what came before xen | |
| 16:03:18 | stephenfin | Oops - wrong nick | |
| 16:03:30 | stephenfin | sdague: Is it still relevant? | |
| 16:03:38 | sdague | stephenfin: I wouldn't think so | |
| 16:03:45 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: no, actually it's different and funky | |
| 16:03:52 | edleafe | asettle: Docs aren't necessary - to the person writing the code. To everyone else, though... | |
| 16:03:57 | sdague | user mode linux was run linux kernels as user processes | |
| 16:04:04 | asettle | edleafe: I think that's the point at the end, right? :p | |
| 16:04:10 | asettle | I wrote my first little python script so I feel ya | |
| 16:04:16 | edleafe | asettle: :) | |
| 16:04:16 | asettle | It is obviously perfect | |
| 16:04:21 | asettle | And makes sense to *everyone* | |
| 16:04:27 | asettle | :p | |
| 16:04:28 | edleafe | but of course | |
| 16:04:29 | sdague | circa late 90s | |
| 16:04:47 | sean-k-mooney | stephenfin: huh that is weird but ok if nova supports it thne great if there is not a ci for it though its broken by default | |
| 16:04:59 | sdague | honestly, uml is kind of docker before docker | |
| 16:06:20 | cfriesen | sdague: wouldn't that be lxc? | |
| 16:06:22 | sean-k-mooney | sdague: so its like lxc/openvz container. e.g a sandboxed system level container/chroot? | |
| 16:06:55 | sdague | sean-k-mooney: yeh, except pre namespaces | |
| 16:07:18 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: sdague: I think it's actually linux implemented using POSIX as the architecture. | |
| 16:08:01 | sdague | anyway, the crux of it, I'd remove all the references to it in the nova space. I expect someone got somethign working in cactus, but never bothered again after | |
| 16:08:06 | sdague | and the reference lasted until now | |
| 16:08:42 | cfriesen | sdague: yeah, agreed. don't see why anyone would actually use it with nova | |
| 16:08:52 | stephenfin | Yup, they're gone | |
| 16:09:02 | stephenfin | There was only one (that I've found so far) | |
| 16:09:14 | sdague | oh, this is why - https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/austin-user-mode-linux | |
| 16:09:27 | sdague | they were attempting to use it for testing instead of 2nd level qemu | |
| 16:09:44 | sean-k-mooney | sdague: looking at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/UML it looks like its pluged in under livbivrt | |
| 16:09:54 | stephenfin | sdague: Importing this config guide is proving slower than I thought (alll the cross-references). I may need to have you take over it if I don't get much further in the next hour or so | |
| 16:10:02 | stephenfin | (I'm gone tomorrow on) | |
| 16:10:04 | sdague | stephenfin: no prob | |
| 16:10:08 | mriedem | melwitt: i've rebased and cleaned up the conflict in the stable branches for https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I8cd056fa17184a98c31547add0e9fb2d363d0908,n,z | |
| 16:10:17 | mriedem | melwitt: now just need to get the series of changes below that one merged | |
| 16:10:58 | sdague | stephenfin: before you leave, if you can send me an email with the patch url, and what the major reference fixing looks like | |
| 16:11:10 | sdague | just to get me running on it quicker | |
| 16:11:21 | sdague | as I'm about to go out for a bike ride while the getting is good | |
| 16:11:40 | stephenfin | Will do | |
| 16:20:59 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: remove provider allocs in confirm/revert resize https://review.openstack.org/488510 | |
| 16:21:00 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: Resource tracker compatibility with Ocata and Pike https://review.openstack.org/491012 | |
| 16:21:00 | openstackgerrit | Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: placement: refactor healing of allocations in RT https://review.openstack.org/491850 | |
| 16:21:26 | jaypipes | dansmith: ok, I did my best on the above but it's icky and may have made a mistake or two. | |
| 16:21:34 | dansmith | okay | |
| 16:21:37 | jaypipes | dansmith: really need your eyeballs on it. | |
| 16:22:07 | dansmith | I guess I didn't think there was that much change needed... | |
| 16:24:01 | dansmith | jaypipes: this replaces the delete with "heal" which doesn't make sense to me | |
| 16:24:03 | dansmith | since we're also still healing in the non-delete path | |
| 16:24:50 | jaypipes | dansmith: the heal will need to recreate allocations for ocata-deleted allocations, which is why I renamed it heal. I know, it's bad | |
| 16:25:04 | dansmith | and it doesn't heal right? it deletes. | |
| 16:25:35 | jaypipes | dansmith: well, this method will need to re-create allocations that an ocata compute node deleted incorrectly. | |
| 16:26:20 | jaypipes | dansmith: if an ocata compute node was the source for a migrate to a pike compute host. | |
| 16:26:31 | dansmith | but that's already done in update_usage_for_instance right? | |
| 16:26:46 | dansmith | in the top patch, conditional on the presence of ocata computes | |
| 16:28:14 | jaypipes | dansmith: ack, sorry, yes, you're right. | |
| 16:28:22 | jaypipes | dansmith: I can rename it back to delete... | |
| 16:28:32 | dansmith | jaypipes: I'm not sure what the point of this patch is though.. just some extra conditions for not calling delete? | |
| 16:29:51 | jaypipes | dansmith: the point of this patch was two things: 1) to only delete allocations when the instance is DELETED or SHELEVED_OFFLOADED and 2) add a bunch of log statements so we can see what state instances are in during this _remove_deleted_instances_allocations() method | |
| 16:30:44 | dansmith | jaypipes: okay I thought we were doing this filtering earlier such that by the time we got here we didn't have anything other than the ones we needed to delete.. | |
| 16:30:55 | jaypipes | dansmith: I added the debug log statements when trying to fix the issue alex_xu brought up about evacuate code paths not being correct. | |
| 16:31:09 | dansmith | we've been round and round about this particular conditional, so maybe I missed something | |
| 16:31:33 | jaypipes | dansmith: the evacuate code paths were not being affected by the update_usage_for_instance() path for some reason. | |
| 16:31:45 | jaypipes | dansmith: on the source host at least. | |
| 16:32:34 | jaypipes | dansmith: so when trying to verify the evacuate code path for scenario when source host is restarted, I was trying to get log messages about the instances in this method. sorry, it got really confusing :( | |
| 16:32:55 | dansmith | jaypipes: so vm_states.ALLOW_RESOURCE_REMOVAL excludes things that aren't deleted or shelved_offloaded, so doesn't that cover us? | |
| 16:33:07 | dansmith | oh, not for deleting allocations I guess | |
| 16:33:17 | jaypipes | right, that actually results in InstanceNotFound. | |
| 16:33:27 | dansmith | what does? | |
| 16:33:32 | jaypipes | when an instance is deleted. | |
| 16:33:41 | jaypipes | the Instance.get_by_uuid() returns InstanceNotFound | |
| 16:34:47 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: doc: Import configuration reference https://review.openstack.org/491853 | |
| 16:35:04 | mriedem | stephenfin: in case you haven't left yet, there are two duplicate upgrade notes for similar things in the libvirt driver about port filtering capability | |
| 16:35:04 | mriedem | https://docs.openstack.org/releasenotes/nova/unreleased.html#id15 | |
| 16:35:05 | jaypipes | dansmith: sorry about all of this :( in trying to address alex_xu's review comments about evacuate I ended up going down the rabbithole. | |
| 16:35:21 | jaypipes | dansmith: and it's likely I've f'd it all up now :( | |
| 16:35:25 | dansmith | jaypipes: okay, yeah, I'm confused I guess | |
| 16:35:32 | stephenfin | mriedem: I assume we can just delete one/ | |