Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-09-01
16:47:29 mriedem but i don't see that filtering happening anywhere
16:48:20 dansmith mriedem: yeah that's not from me, that's from dd6fb1246ff2789bd78b772b45e1fcac21eda67a
16:48:29 dansmith which looks like it had a filter in it which is now gone
16:48:41 dansmith that makes no sense to me though,
16:48:47 dansmith since that code already only looks at evacuations
16:49:48 mriedem https://review.openstack.org/#/c/101803/ predates the robustify that used the migration record for filtering
16:50:12 dansmith ah yep
16:50:20 mriedem so we just need to cleanup the comments in here a bit,
16:50:22 dansmith so maybe my bad for not removing that then
16:50:27 mriedem so if we don't take this change,
16:50:41 mriedem and the compute is up and running, need to think about what the RT is going to do
16:51:23 mriedem so we'd remove the allocation on the source node when it starts up
16:51:29 dansmith which is correct
16:51:38 mriedem right b/c the guest was deleted,
16:51:45 mriedem the instance isn't actually gone, and it points at the source host still
16:51:51 dansmith and it looks to me like we would be able to run rebuild on it
16:52:25 dansmith you can run rebuild from error state and it seems like it'll just pick up the evacuation and try again,
16:52:30 dansmith but not if we error it out like this patch does
16:52:55 mriedem the update_available_resource task is going to query for instances on this host/node, and pull this in since it's not deleted
16:53:02 mriedem pass that to _update_usage_from_instances
16:53:27 mriedem which calls _update_usage_from_instance with has_ocata_computes=True
16:53:30 mriedem *False
16:53:38 mriedem assuming you're upgraded
16:54:03 mriedem and it won't recreate the allocation in placement for the source node, which again is correct since we don't have the guest anymore
16:54:16 mriedem if you have ocata computes, it would, but...
16:54:18 mriedem meh?
16:54:18 dansmith we'll create the new allocation during the rebuild
16:54:56 dansmith and when build finishes it'll replace the doubled (due to migration) allocation with the single one for the new host
16:54:59 mriedem the instance wouldn't necessarily be in ERROR state,
16:55:08 mriedem and conductor doesn't set it to ERROR state if it fails to find a host
16:55:08 dansmith it would from that novalidhost
16:55:12 mriedem nope
16:55:17 mriedem it just resets the task_state to None
16:55:18 dansmith it does _set_vm_state_and_notify()
16:55:29 mriedem self._set_vm_state_and_notify(context, instance.uuid,
16:55:30 mriedem 'rebuild_server',
16:55:30 mriedem {'vm_state': instance.vm_state,
16:55:30 mriedem 'task_state': None}, ex, request_spec)
16:55:34 mriedem i've been all up in this code for a week
16:55:35 dansmith oh, does that not set it to error?
16:55:38 mriedem nope
16:55:40 dansmith I see
16:55:46 dansmith well a reset state will put it in error
16:55:52 mriedem if you tell it to :)
16:56:00 mriedem reset-state takes the state you want it in
16:56:01 mriedem i htink
16:56:04 dansmith doesn't reset state default to error?
16:56:11 dansmith no, it's just error or --active as an option I think
16:56:34 mriedem oh i don't know what the CLI does
16:56:37 mriedem but the API doesn't default
16:56:40 mriedem "The state of the server to be set, active or error are valid."
16:56:55 dansmith well, sure
16:57:10 mriedem yeah default on the CLI is 'error'
16:57:38 dansmith I guess we could make it go to error state in here as a change if you think that's better
16:57:51 dansmith I think that won't affect rebuilds because we don't schedule if we do a rebuild, but do for evac
16:58:02 mriedem right we bypass the scheduler for rebuild
16:59:05 mriedem so yeah we could set the instance to ERROR state in conductor...
16:59:17 mriedem if it's an evac
16:59:20 mriedem *failed evac
17:01:31 mriedem well, now i'm not sure what to do
17:03:15 dansmith have a beer?
17:05:40 mriedem i left a summary in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/499237/
17:05:52 mriedem feel free to r'ar or whatever
17:05:56 mriedem i'm going to make lunch
17:58:37 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update docs for _destroy_evacuated_instance https://review.openstack.org/500144
18:03:28 openstackgerrit Sean Dague proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: test cells v1/nova-net without screen https://review.openstack.org/500151
18:03:42 sdague mriedem: doesn't seem like cellsv1 job is even in experimental queue for devstack?
18:04:26 mriedem it should be
18:04:45 mriedem used to be anyway
18:05:26 mriedem but yeah i don't see it in there now
18:06:01 mriedem only in experimental for tempest and nova from what i see
18:09:16 mriedem sdague: are you going to add that or should i?
18:10:16 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: doc: link to placement api-ref and history docs from main index https://review.openstack.org/498977
18:10:16 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: doc: link to versioned notification samples from main index https://review.openstack.org/500081
18:26:12 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove dest node allocation if evacuate MoveClaim fails https://review.openstack.org/499878
18:26:12 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Modernize set_vm_state_and_notify https://review.openstack.org/499799
18:28:10 fried_rice Procedural question: can I repoint the spec link for a blueprint? Need to submit a q spec for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/use-service-catalog-for-endpoints
18:28:10 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Update docs for _destroy_evacuated_instances https://review.openstack.org/500144
18:29:11 mriedem fried_rice: i have edit rights
18:29:13 mriedem so i can
18:29:26 fried_rice mriedem Ah, cool. So I'll shoot ya the link once I have it. Thanks.
18:30:42 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova stable/pike: Fix nova assisted volume snapshots https://review.openstack.org/498979
18:31:02 mriedem thanks for making me think of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP1KHL0j0GU
18:40:05 sdague mriedem: either way, I was just surprised. I feel like we had this issue before
18:40:56 mriedem sdague: it comes up every time a devstack change breaks the cells v1 job and blocks nova
18:41:13 mriedem then we fix whatever and forget about it
18:47:00 fried_rice mriedem So the other thing is, this is no longer going to be "use service catalog for endpoints" - it's going to be "use keystoneauth1 discovery for endpoints". Can the blueprint-identifying name be changed; or do I need to file a new blueprint; or do we not care that the identifier is out of sync?
18:47:03 sdague ok, I really thought we merged it the last time :)
18:49:06 mriedem fried_rice: changing the bp name in lp would break the link in the old spec
18:49:09 sdague mriedem: https://review.openstack.org/500169
18:49:14 mriedem we could file a new blueprint and supersede the old one
18:49:32 fried_rice mriedem Okay, I'll do that. Thanks.
18:49:43 fried_rice long as there's a backtrail.
18:49:48 fried_rice supersede works
18:50:37 mriedem sdague: +1
18:51:23 mriedem dansmith: superdan: sdague: btw, i'm huawei now but guess what i get to do
18:51:24 mriedem BCG
18:51:34 mriedem jealous!?
18:51:47 dansmith wooooo
19:03:38 mriedem but no videos...

Earlier   Later