Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2017-10-17
09:10:36 jichen OpenStack-API-Version: placement 1.10
09:10:37 jichen vary: OpenStack-API-Version
09:10:39 jichen x-openstack-request-id: req-4ce20136-afb8-405e-86ff-2397a21cc1c2
09:10:39 cdent jichen: you’re right that we should probably be consistent about it, but it looks like we weren’t. I think the logic that was used is that a location header is a good idea if the response is empty
09:10:40 jichen Connection: close
09:10:42 jichen {"traits": ["CUSTOM_ABC"], "resource_provider_generation": 19}
09:10:44 jichen sorry, wrong lURL
09:11:03 jichen 2nd URL I used is to PUT traits
09:11:10 cdent jichen: for long pastes like that it is better to use a pastebin like http://paste.openstack.org/
09:11:17 jichen ok, right now
09:11:31 cdent that’s put to add traits to a resource provider, not to create a trait
09:11:57 jichen cdent: http://paste.openstack.org/show/623800/
09:14:20 priya__ hi ..could somebody review the commit - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/508533/
09:14:44 cdent jichen: right, so that request corresponds with this handler: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/placement/handlers/trait.py#L217-L248 which does not set the header
09:14:52 cdent jichen: do you think it should?
09:16:37 jichen cdent: I guess I used wrong URL ... I think we should not add a header as this is a just 'associate'
09:16:59 jichen so I will update the document of placement api ref.. it doesn't have the info about this header
09:18:10 masber good afternoon all, I am having an issue resizing nodes. My hardware runs NUMA and I pin my vcpus for better performance. I could not resize the instance because it could not fit any NUMA node so what I did was to shutdown the vms on that node so the kvm could relocate them and make more space for the extra resources
09:18:51 cdent I think we didn’t end up adding the info about headers because there’s no clear use case for them. When I wrote the first bits of the code that did add a location header, I did it because it is standard form: create something? then put a location header in the response. We don’t necessarily need to cloud the documentation with that except perhaps in the case of POST /resource_providers (because that tells you wha
09:18:51 cdent was created)
09:19:01 cdent jichen: in everything else there are other ways
09:19:04 masber I resized the node while it was shutdown, and then I tried to confirm the resize but confirmation failed saying "cannot resize instance while it is in vm_state resized"
09:19:40 masber since then I can even start resizing the node as state stays as active
09:19:45 masber *can't
09:20:03 masber is this a bug or am I doing something stupid?
09:21:12 jichen cdent: ok, I can live with that, I thought we return location for every thing we created like you mentioned; and you are right, seems no clear use case for that, thanks for your guide
09:21:50 cdent jichen: you’re welcome, and thank you for trying to make sure we are consistent, we can probalby do better on that.
09:22:25 jichen cdent: yes, I will make more analysis on that :), thanks
09:22:52 openstackgerrit Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/osc-placement master: CLI for allocations https://review.openstack.org/457534
09:22:52 openstackgerrit Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/osc-placement master: CLI for usages https://review.openstack.org/457535
09:22:53 openstackgerrit Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/osc-placement master: CLI for aggregates https://review.openstack.org/505643
09:22:53 openstackgerrit Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/osc-placement master: [WIP] CLI for resource classes https://review.openstack.org/511182
09:22:54 openstackgerrit Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/osc-placement master: [WIP] RP list: member_of and resources parameters https://review.openstack.org/511183
09:31:43 priya__ cdent : Could you please review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/508533/
09:32:59 cdent priya__: yes, will put it on my list for today
09:33:54 priya__ thank you !
10:45:13 openstackgerrit Naichuan Sun proposed openstack/nova master: VGPU_support: add enabled white list https://review.openstack.org/512580
11:11:16 openstackgerrit Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/nova master: Change 'InstancePCIRequest' spec field https://review.openstack.org/449257
11:16:23 ralonsoh alex_xu: hi, if you have time, can you take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/502306/?
11:17:23 ralonsoh alex_xu: BTW, this one was approved last cycle. Half of the code is already merged. I would like to have it approved this cycle to continue the work: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/504895/
11:24:17 openstackgerrit edan david proposed openstack/nova master: Don't overwrite binding-profile https://review.openstack.org/505613
12:21:30 cdent alex_xu: if you didn’t see this bit of irc chat yesterday, it covers some of the issues with shared providers and traits: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-nova/%23openstack-nova.2017-10-16.log.html#t2017-10-16T18:37:18
12:21:50 cdent it took quite a while to figure out what efried was talking about but we finally figured it out in that chat
12:25:05 efried That's me. It can take a while to figure out wtf I'm talking about.
12:25:28 efried I'd like to think it's because they're such advanced concepts, I have to explain them carefully to lesser mortals.
12:25:41 efried (In case you're just joining us, naw, that ain't it.)
12:26:25 cdent that ^^ was driven by alex’s latest comment on your spec, on the principle of more context is better
12:27:41 efried cdent I know, and I appreciate it. I'm just ribbin ya.
12:29:15 cdent I know, I’m giving you context on the context giving, for sake of contextualizing the people in our context, contextually
12:29:47 alex_xu ralonsoh: yea, add it to my review list
12:30:04 cdent soon the ai which is learning human behavior from the log of this channel will achieve consciousness, and presumably wipe us from the face of the earth
12:30:16 alex_xu cdent: efried yea, I read that today
12:30:37 alex_xu cdent: efried, the current trait implement supports that case
12:31:08 alex_xu the current trait implement will try to collect the traits from the RP and sharing RP which in the same aggregates
12:31:22 efried alex_xu The case where RAID5 and SSD are split across the compute RP and the shared storage RP?
12:32:32 alex_xu the problem is the current implementation of https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/resource_provider.py#L2453 doesn't return the correct PRs
12:33:17 alex_xu _get_all_with_shared only return that root RP once.
12:33:34 cdent alex_xu: root is a bad term in this context :)
12:33:34 efried alex_xu My contention is that it *can't* return the correct RPs for this scenario under the current semantics.
12:33:51 cdent efried: your forthcoming test will make it all clear :D
12:34:10 alex_xu for that case, actually we expect return that root RP twoice, and then we should generate two combinations: #1 root RP with local disk, #2 root RP with shared disk
12:34:35 alex_xu cdent: forgive me, let me use root rp first :) that pain for me also
12:34:57 efried alex_xu Actually, it won't return the compute+localdisk combination, because that wouldn't satisfy the RAID5 trait.
12:34:59 alex_xu and then, the trait implementation will find out #1 and #2 which have enough trait
12:35:37 efried But it *will* return the compute+shared combination, even though it *shouldn't*.
12:36:23 efried It shouldn't because the shared storage doesn't satisfy the SSD trait. But placement has no way of knowing that RAID & SSD were both supposed to apply to the storage, whereas the HW_CPU... trait wasn't.
12:37:56 alex_xu efried: I didn't have test it, but I think the current code will return compute+local
12:38:09 alex_xu and it never return the compute+shared combination
12:38:18 efried alex_xu Because of that bug? Maybe.
12:38:47 alex_xu because the implement of _get_all_with_shared
12:39:32 alex_xu but that still doesn't correct, you are expecting _get_all_with_shared return two combinations
12:39:56 efried _get_all_with_shared is the piece that doesn't yet take traits into account?
12:40:01 alex_xu and then the trait implement will filter out the correct one
12:40:07 alex_xu efried: yes
12:40:27 efried Right, gotcha. So you're right: _get_all_with_shared *should* return *both* combinations. (If it's not, that's a bug.)
12:40:51 efried And then the code you're writing *should* filter *both* of them out and yield zero candidates.
12:40:55 alex_xu efried: because this https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/objects/resource_provider.py#L895
12:41:04 efried But there's no way to write your code to do that.
12:41:25 alex_xu that condition assumes that there only have the one case in (local and shared)
12:41:55 alex_xu efried: but the first thing we should figure out is that whether we want to support that case
12:41:57 efried ohh, you're missing a LEFT JOIN
12:42:21 efried Well, I contend we can't *not* support that case.
12:42:26 efried At least not long term.
12:42:56 cdent I’m going to save [t 3Vz8] because it is probably useful to whip out just about any time
12:42:56 purplerbot <efried> ohh, you're missing a LEFT JOIN [2017-10-17 12:41:57.325623] [n 3Vz8]
12:43:34 efried (c) 2017
12:44:09 efried So alex_xu, if we were going to say we don't support that scenario, how would that be worded?
12:44:43 alex_xu at least, currently the nova doesn't support the case we have local disk and shared disk
12:45:06 alex_xu actually nova doesn't know about the disk is local or shared, it just create the instance image in a directory
12:45:37 alex_xu under that directory, it maybe local or a NFS...
12:45:52 efried alex_xu What about local ephemeral (boot) plus volumes?
12:46:10 alex_xu and I didn't have any real world case similar to that in my mind
12:46:34 alex_xu efried: the resource class DISK_GB is only about local ephemeral disk
12:46:54 alex_xu s/local ephemeral disk/ephemeral disk/
12:47:54 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: placement: set/check if inventory change in tree https://review.openstack.org/470575
12:48:45 efried alex_xu fixed nit ^
12:49:33 efried cdent Did you want me to rename that 'p' var ^ ?
12:50:25 efried cdent I don't think we can afford to sweep this under the rug now and just hope it doesn't rear its head later.
12:50:32 efried Sorry, that was meant for alex_xu
12:50:56 efried (I *totally* think we can sweep a terse variable name under the rug)

Earlier   Later