| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-09-05 | |||
| 22:49:01 | cdent | presumably the response to option 2 is “no” | |
| 22:49:04 | cdent | as that’s not "real" | |
| 22:49:12 | jaypipes | cdent: nested resource providers allows the placement API to understand whether, say, a PF that provides some VFs is on a particular compute node. Nested providers doesn't, however, solve the problem of how do we model the *request* for resources when the user doesn't know that there is a nested relationship between things. | |
| 22:49:40 | jaypipes | efried: there is no such limitation. I'm not sure what you're getting at. | |
| 22:50:19 | mikal | mriedem: I am a bad man and realized once that shred patch had merged that it probably should have had a reno, so I've added one in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/501022/ | |
| 22:51:14 | efried | jaypipes What you and cdent were saying about breaking opaqueness? And a step backwards for original goals of allocation_candidates. I didn't catch where that came from. | |
| 22:51:15 | cdent | jaypipes: I get that the request modeling is a limitation, but if were to set that aside for a moment and we could express the request well then the we could present a complete set of allocations in response, right? The limitation as described in your paste is because the current request doesn’t have all the state. | |
| 22:52:03 | cdent | efried: ideally it would be possible to take the first item in the allocation_request list and send that to /allocations/{consumer_uuid} without modifications to make a “claim” | |
| 22:52:23 | efried | cdent Why doesn't that still work in this scenario? | |
| 22:52:34 | jaypipes | efried: the items in the "allocation_requests" part of the HTTP response for the GET /allocation_candidates placement API call is intended to be able to pass as-is (i.e. opaquely without the caller needing to know the structure of the HTTP payload) to the PUT /allocations/{consumer_uuid} call.' | |
| 22:52:38 | cdent | but if you’ve used multple requests to construct the set of rps, we don’t have enough info to construction all the pieces of the allocation | |
| 22:53:09 | jaypipes | cdent: correct. | |
| 22:53:25 | cdent | feh | |
| 22:53:43 | efried | Okay, I don't understand that, but I'm sure it's because I haven't read everything yet. | |
| 22:54:17 | cdent | efried: if you haven’t got it after some cogitation, ask me again a bit later and I can try to explain it using different words | |
| 22:54:49 | cdent | we’re making some shortcuts in our explanations that aren’t really helping matters | |
| 22:54:53 | jaypipes | cdent: thus my earlier comment that "fuck it..." we will probably end up needing yet another REST API call to placement that takes as a payload some crazypants HOT template|TOSCA YAML|CloudFormation template thing that describes all the various components of the instance that the user wants Nova to atomically claim and spawn. | |
| 22:54:54 | efried | cdent Thanks - I don't think it's words; it's background. | |
| 22:55:25 | cdent | jaypipes: i believe that’s where I feel like borrowing dansmith’s gun | |
| 22:55:44 | jaypipes | cdent: yup. and the reason I keep bringing up that I hate Nova being an orchestrator. | |
| 22:55:46 | dansmith | cdent: what kind you want? semi-auto? large bore? hollow points? | |
| 22:56:04 | cdent | dansmith: I’m away for home, so would feel bad for making a mess | |
| 22:56:08 | cdent | from | |
| 22:56:14 | efried | Every time this happens, though, I go away and study some more, and next time I come back and read the eavesdrop or whatever, I actually get it. I'm hoping to be good enough by the PTG not to get lost when this stuff is being discussed live. | |
| 22:56:15 | dansmith | cdent: okay so hollow-points then | |
| 22:56:17 | jaypipes | dansmith: shotty. it's got a "good spread". | |
| 22:56:41 | jaypipes | efried: no worries, man. these conversations are important to have. | |
| 22:56:45 | cfriesen__ | .700 nitro express | |
| 22:56:55 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Split out the core of the ironic flavor migration https://review.openstack.org/501024 | |
| 22:56:56 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add nova-manage db command for ironic flavor migrations https://review.openstack.org/501025 | |
| 22:57:01 | dansmith | mriedem: dtantsur|afk ^ | |
| 22:57:07 | jaypipes | efried: as much as they just inevitably end up reinforcing my annoyance with orchestration. | |
| 22:57:13 | dansmith | needs a reno but I'm out of brain power and the smoke is cutting my oxygen supply | |
| 22:57:49 | efried | cdent jaypipes So what we're talking about here is that we made an architectural call to be able to take a chunk of the placement response and just blat it into a (single) allocation request; but if we've made multiple calls to placement we'll have multiple such chunks, and there's currently no semantic for "combining" them into a single allocation request. | |
| 22:58:00 | efried | Did I get that right? | |
| 22:59:03 | cdent | jaypipes: sadly, somewhere is going to have to have a model for that tosca thing for an instance doign nested rp stuff and it is going to need to land on a compute (so the instance can build correctly). we planned ourselves into this corner, is just the way the world is for now :( | |
| 22:59:40 | cdent | efried: yes, pretty much. we’d need to build that “reassembler” in the scheduler and in a perfect world wouldn’t have to | |
| 23:00:10 | efried | In practical terms, the "opaque" allocation request is just a list of things, and we would just append those lists together and be fine. We just didn't wanna have to do that. | |
| 23:00:12 | cdent | we now need to be smart in at least two spots | |
| 23:00:53 | cdent | efried: not exactly. | |
| 23:01:11 | cdent | If we are lisp coders and are talking about this problem, then yes, we building lists | |
| 23:01:24 | cdent | but the selection of pieces is not just reassambling a sequence | |
| 23:03:53 | efried | jaypipes cdent I gotta run. FYI, I've been assembling notes which I eventually planned to link off of the main PTG etherpad once they were in a state where they were sanely readable by someone other than me. I'm not sure if we've reached that point yet, but... https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-ptg-queens-generic-device-management | |
| 23:04:21 | cdent | thanks for doing that efried, you want annotations in the realm of “nowish” or “laterish”? | |
| 23:06:03 | efried | cdent I guess any-time-ish is fine, thanks. I didn't think I was done with it for sure, but I believe I've at least removed most of my horribly-misinformed early thoughts/ideas. | |
| 23:06:22 | cdent | ✔ | |
| 23:07:06 | efried | Thanks as always for talking through this with me jaypipes cdent dansmith sean-k-mooney | |
| 23:09:46 | jaypipes | ciao | |
| 23:28:41 | gmann | mriedem, +1, i overlooked | |
| 23:30:11 | gmann | mriedem, can we have a specless BP for index schema chages - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/500347/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/499091/ etc | |
| 23:30:30 | gmann | mriedem, that will be basically continuation of this - https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/consistent-query-parameters-validation | |
| 23:30:54 | gmann | it will be easy to track and capture any accidental API changes | |
| 23:37:00 | gmann | mriedem, created one, check if it looks fine - https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/json-schema-validation-for-index-query-param | |
| 23:37:06 | gmann | alex_xu, ^^ | |
| 23:39:02 | alex_xu | gmann: thanks, that's great | |
| 23:47:07 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add a spec for POST /allocations in placement https://review.openstack.org/499259 | |
| 23:50:22 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Add nova-manage db command for ironic flavor migrations https://review.openstack.org/501025 | |
| 23:51:57 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Add recreate test for forced host evacuate not setting dest allocations https://review.openstack.org/499678 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2017-09-06 | |||
| 00:33:33 | mriedem | gmann: these don't require microversion changes, correct? | |
| 00:34:00 | openstackgerrit | wanghongtaozz proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: spelling error availiable change to available https://review.openstack.org/501043 | |
| 00:34:58 | gmann | mriedem, yes. only thing i want to confirm from alex_xu about restricting the int convertible string as limit like '1' it used to be valid and converted by utils previously and now it will be 400 | |
| 00:35:26 | gmann | i think we discussed it in original spec but i do not remember the consensus . | |
| 00:36:17 | mriedem | gmann: if a microversion bump is required then i think we need a spec, | |
| 00:36:22 | mriedem | otherwise i'm ok with specless | |
| 00:37:06 | gmann | mriedem, yea, if so it need spec. we will discuss it in today meeting for all cases and ll update you | |
| 00:37:22 | mriedem | thanks | |
| 00:38:10 | openstackgerrit | wanghongtaozz proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: spelling mistake availiable change to available https://review.openstack.org/501045 | |
| 00:41:29 | openstackgerrit | wanghongtaozz proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: spelling mistake prefered change to preferred https://review.openstack.org/501046 | |
| 00:43:22 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: WIP spelling error availiable change to available https://review.openstack.org/501043 | |
| 00:47:27 | openstackgerrit | wanghongtaozz proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: spelling mistake intergration change to integration https://review.openstack.org/501047 | |
| 00:47:54 | alex_xu | mriedem: gmann it needn't microversion, I think just just add query params validation for the exist API and keep it same behavour for the API | |
| 00:49:02 | gmann | alex_xu, but we are doing non negative integer for limit - https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/schemas/keypairs.py#L109 | |
| 00:49:21 | gmann | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/dbfde14978d4e4374c1fc1085c7f061b2a22d2c6/nova/api/validation/parameter_types.py#L438 | |
| 00:50:00 | gmann | alex_xu, this is only case change the behavior for 'int' 200 -> 400 | |
| 00:50:01 | alex_xu | gmann: that isn't backward-compatible? | |
| 00:50:26 | alex_xu | gmann: I remember there are some validation in the python code for the limits, that should check the non-negative value also | |
| 00:51:06 | gmann | alex_xu, humm | |
| 00:51:15 | gmann | alex_xu, i found the flow like this | |
| 00:51:16 | gmann | 1. https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/dbfde14978d4e4374c1fc1085c7f061b2a22d2c6/nova/api/openstack/common.py#L189 | |
| 00:51:30 | gmann | 2. https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/dbfde14978d4e4374c1fc1085c7f061b2a22d2c6/nova/api/openstack/common.py#L202 | |
| 00:52:10 | gmann | 3. https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/dbfde14978d4e4374c1fc1085c7f061b2a22d2c6/nova/utils.py#L883 | |
| 00:52:26 | gmann | 3rd one convert the '1' to 1 | |
| 00:54:23 | alex_xu | gmann: there is parameter 'min_value', that is limited to non-negative? | |
| 01:02:00 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: tests: Remove useless test https://review.openstack.org/483031 | |
| 01:02:53 | openstackgerrit | Jackie Truong proposed openstack/nova master: Add trusted_certificates to REST API https://review.openstack.org/486204 | |
| 01:06:47 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Cleanup allocations on invalid dest node during live migration https://review.openstack.org/498861 | |
| 01:08:21 | alex_xu | gmann: I may not clear the question | |
| 01:08:34 | alex_xu | the value of '1' will get 400? | |
| 01:09:12 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: iso8601.is8601.Utc No Longer Exists https://review.openstack.org/498287 | |
| 01:14:59 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: [placement] POST /allocations to set allocations for >1 consumers https://review.openstack.org/500073 | |
| 01:15:00 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: [placement] Allow _set_allocations to delete allocations https://review.openstack.org/501051 | |
| 01:15:28 | cdent | dansmith: some of the jiggery pokery in that ^ is starting to get a bit wack | |
| 01:15:32 | openstackgerrit | Jackie Truong proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.54 - Add trusted_certificates param https://review.openstack.org/500396 | |
| 01:38:20 | openstackgerrit | jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: conf: remove deprecated 'project_id_regex' opt https://review.openstack.org/501057 | |
| 02:05:09 | openstackgerrit | jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: conf: Remove quota_networks options https://review.openstack.org/501068 | |
| 02:21:10 | openstackgerrit | Chenghui Yu proposed openstack/nova master: Remove usage of kwarg retry_on_request in API https://review.openstack.org/501073 | |
| 04:43:58 | openstackgerrit | Pooja Jadhav proposed openstack/nova master: Fix ValueError if invalid max_rows passed to db purge https://review.openstack.org/500771 | |
| 05:03:05 | itlinux | there are 4 compute nodes.. and those images are cirros.. | |
| 05:11:03 | itlinux | hello team.. | |
| 05:11:29 | itlinux | looks like the scheduler gets stuck when I try to spin up few machines at one time.. | |