| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2017-11-27 | |||
| 19:10:58 | mriedem | i don't know that it needs to go to ocata | |
| 19:11:13 | mriedem | i think this actually crept up in CI because posting allocations during scheduling failed | |
| 19:11:15 | mriedem | which wasn't in ocata | |
| 19:12:15 | jaypipes | mriedem: I'll handle the backport to pike, then, no prob. | |
| 19:13:22 | sdague | mriedem: +2, though I'm still rather down on all the deepcopy and modify pattern, I think it creates more of these bugs in the future | |
| 19:13:35 | sdague | vs. just do a full expand every time there is a new tweak on the schema | |
| 19:22:23 | mriedem | sdague: thanks | |
| 19:22:27 | mriedem | dansmith: here is my proposed reno https://gist.github.com/mriedem/3da0a2edf18be0487e8becad31293077 | |
| 19:22:36 | mriedem | for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521186/ | |
| 19:22:44 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: finish refactor AllocCandidates._get_by_filters() https://review.openstack.org/516782 | |
| 19:23:04 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: required traits for no sharing providers https://review.openstack.org/517027 | |
| 19:23:20 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Add ProviderSummary.resource_class_names @property https://review.openstack.org/517646 | |
| 19:31:23 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Refined fix for validating image on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521186 | |
| 19:31:23 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add regression test for rebuild with new image doubling allocations https://review.openstack.org/521153 | |
| 19:31:24 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521662 | |
| 19:31:37 | mriedem | jaypipes: i added a reno on https://review.openstack.org/521186 which you were +2 on | |
| 19:33:43 | cfriesen | when updating the default quota class set, if I set a value lower than the current usage will that prevent any more resources from being consumed? updating quota-sets has the "force" option for this case, but I don't see that for quota class sets. | |
| 19:36:51 | mriedem | cfriesen: quota classes aren't tied to a tenant | |
| 19:37:00 | mriedem | so there is no 'current usage' on a quota class | |
| 19:37:38 | mriedem | as for "if I set a value lower than the current usage will that prevent any more resources from being consumed" - i'm not sure | |
| 19:37:54 | mriedem | it might | |
| 19:38:00 | cfriesen | mriedem: I was envisioning usage as being basically per tenant. | |
| 19:38:33 | mriedem | we check limits based on (1) is there a specific limit for this project, (2) if not, is there a specific limit for this quota class, (3) if not, what's the configured limit | |
| 19:38:37 | cfriesen | so you have the class default as 10, the tenant currently has 9, I change the class default to 8 | |
| 19:39:06 | mriedem | i think that will cause the next instance create to be overquota | |
| 19:39:27 | cfriesen | that matches my understanding, thanks. it's odd we have "force" for that when setting tenant quotas but not the global default | |
| 19:39:34 | mriedem | the point in changing the limits to be below the usage (like the force parameter in PUT /os-quota-sets) is to get to the desired limit regardless of current usage | |
| 19:40:01 | mriedem | if we checked that on the global default, we'd have to check usage for all projects | |
| 19:40:10 | mriedem | and, | |
| 19:40:26 | mriedem | we could be tracking quota for projects that no longer actually exist in keystone | |
| 19:40:35 | cfriesen | true enough | |
| 19:40:54 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Implement query param schema for delete assisted vol https://review.openstack.org/513668 | |
| 19:41:07 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Versioned notifications for service create and delete https://review.openstack.org/519588 | |
| 20:08:58 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Refined fix for validating image on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/523212 | |
| 20:08:58 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Add regression test for rebuild with new image doubling allocations https://review.openstack.org/523213 | |
| 20:08:59 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/523214 | |
| 20:15:25 | openstackgerrit | Eric Berglund proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: PowerVM Driver: SEA https://review.openstack.org/523216 | |
| 20:19:37 | cfriesen | mriedem: when querying quota details including usage for a tenant/user, does it only count resources created by that user? | |
| 20:20:42 | mriedem | cfriesen: you should talk to melwitt | |
| 20:27:39 | mriedem | cfriesen: in general quotas are on the usage in the project, | |
| 20:27:41 | mriedem | except for keypairs | |
| 20:28:25 | mriedem | you can see how usage is counted by the methods called for each CountableResource here https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/quota.py#L1903 | |
| 20:28:58 | cfriesen | mriedem: thanks | |
| 20:30:35 | mriedem | so i guess PUT /os-quota-sets/{tenant_id} is a bit weird if you're updating limits for keypairs, since those are per-user, so that should really be something like PUT /os-qouta-sets/{tenant_id}/key_pairs/{user_id} - or something like that | |
| 20:32:24 | cfriesen | quotas in general is a mess. the mapping between the HTTP API and the internal representation is really indirect. Looking at the quota for a user/tenant, it takes multiple queries to figure if the limit came from a tenant/user quota, a tenant quota, the default quota class, or the default in the code or config file. | |
| 20:34:38 | artom | mriedem, dansmith, I think we may have gotten a filter wrong, but I could just be being an idiot. Review left. | |
| 20:35:34 | mriedem | cfriesen: that's what i explained before | |
| 20:35:59 | mriedem | cfriesen: and why i wrote https://review.openstack.org/#/c/411035/ | |
| 20:47:46 | mriedem | artom: so just AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation at this point | |
| 20:47:47 | mriedem | ? | |
| 20:48:07 | artom | mriedem, yeah. Am I correct in wondering why it's True? | |
| 20:48:20 | mriedem | yeah i think that's a carry over from PS5 when it used to be called POLICY_FILTER | |
| 20:48:24 | mriedem | and got lumped in as 'policy' | |
| 20:48:35 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521186/5..7/nova/scheduler/filters/aggregate_multitenancy_isolation.py | |
| 20:49:12 | artom | Cool, so I'm not in the field | |
| 20:50:54 | mriedem | ok so i think i'll just change that one unless dansmith objects | |
| 20:51:09 | dansmith | I'm sure I don't | |
| 20:52:10 | artom | dansmith is like this pigeon at this point: https://imgur.com/gallery/Y5Ps3 | |
| 20:52:37 | dansmith | pretty much | |
| 20:53:01 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Refined fix for validating image on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521186 | |
| 20:53:02 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add regression test for rebuild with new image doubling allocations https://review.openstack.org/521153 | |
| 20:53:02 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix doubling allocations on rebuild https://review.openstack.org/521662 | |
| 20:53:52 | mriedem | artom: are you happy now? | |
| 20:56:09 | artom | mriedem, sorry what? I've gone and joined dansmith and the pigeon on the dog: https://i.imgur.com/ijgWRzw.jpg | |
| 20:56:19 | artom | mriedem, in seriousness though, yes. Thanks for being patient :) | |
| 20:57:16 | mriedem | approved, thanks for being thorough | |
| 20:57:41 | mriedem | just like henry david | |
| 20:57:52 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/522929 | |
| 20:58:39 | artom | Oh and this means I get to do all those downstream CVE backports I signed for | |
| 20:59:11 | artom | So, actually, I have another nit I'd like to bikeshed over for the entire week | |
| 21:15:39 | openstackgerrit | Claudiu Belu proposed openstack/nova master: POC: tests: autospecs all the mock.patch usages https://review.openstack.org/470775 | |
| 21:17:19 | claudiub|2 | mriedem: hi. if you're still interested about mock autospecing, the above patch enforces autospec on all mock.patch calls. it does have a few hacks though, if you're willing to accept the compromise. | |
| 21:23:44 | belmoreira | dansmith: was testing what you proposed. I though I had a good solution... now I feel embarrassed :) | |
| 21:23:46 | belmoreira | dansmith: It works great! thanks | |
| 21:24:52 | dansmith | belmoreira: cool, glad to hear it | |
| 21:26:20 | belmoreira | dansmith: do you think this can still be added into newton? | |
| 21:26:39 | dansmith | belmoreira: not backported upstream most likely, but it should apply easily (as you know) | |
| 21:27:50 | belmoreira | ok, thanks again | |
| 21:32:21 | cfriesen | mriedem: did we ever figure out what to do about keypairs and users/tenants? (like where one user creates a heat stack and another within the same tenant can't delete it) | |
| 21:32:40 | cfriesen | can't find anything in the etherpads | |
| 21:34:01 | mriedem | cfriesen: you can now rebuild an instance with a new key_name | |
| 21:34:18 | mriedem | https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/queens/approved/rebuild-keypair-reset.html | |
| 21:35:29 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance action record for attach/detach/swap volumes https://review.openstack.org/517205 | |
| 21:37:17 | cfriesen | mriedem: right, I knew about that part. but I thought some people were talking about how keypairs should really be owned by the tenant. Could be it never actually got written down. | |
| 21:37:47 | mriedem | cfriesen: i'm not really remembering that | |
| 21:37:53 | mriedem | cfriesen: maybe sdague does | |
| 21:38:22 | cfriesen | thx | |
| 21:43:18 | sdague | keypairs are the only resource not owned by the tenant | |
| 21:44:10 | sdague | it makes for a very weird model of ownership, because the point was supposed to be that tenants owned all the things, and users were just permissions to be part of a tenant | |
| 22:04:51 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: Optional separate database for placement API https://review.openstack.org/362766 | |
| 22:19:28 | melwitt | cfriesen, mriedem: I recall some discussion about how user A in a tenant can't ever view user B's keypairs in the same tenant. I just can't remember where/when that was | |
| 22:19:59 | melwitt | it's so baked in that it would probably be difficult to change | |
| 22:21:17 | cfriesen | melwitt: true. what about the the weirdness of per-tenant keypair quotas when keypairs belong to users across all tenants? | |
| 22:23:28 | melwitt | cfriesen: currently, I think you can set keypair quota per tenant but what it means is "how many keypairs can each user in the tenant have" | |
| 22:23:52 | melwitt | are you thinking of a per tenant quota that means "how many keypairs can this tenant have in total"? | |
| 22:23:59 | cfriesen | melwitt: but a user can exist in multiple tenants, so which one applies? | |
| 22:24:15 | melwitt | whichever one the user is authing as at the moment | |
| 22:24:34 | melwitt | i.e. the tenant passed in the REST API request | |
| 22:24:42 | cfriesen | okay, that makes sense in a weird sort of way. | |
| 22:25:06 | cfriesen | it does mean your usage in one tenant could go up due to activity in another tenant | |