Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-02-05
20:00:05 mriedem we then make a copy of that list per instance https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/compute/api.py#L1267
20:00:27 mriedem i'm wondering if we're overwriting or losing any of the bdm.attachment_id records when creating multiple instances
20:00:31 mriedem maybe it's ok
20:01:29 mriedem might be a decent test though, create >1 instances in the same request using the same volume and make sure each instance has unique attachments to that volume
20:02:11 mriedem i suppose if you aren't using a multiattach volume, the 2nd instance in the loop would fail to create an attachment to the volume because the volume's attach_status will be 'attaching'
20:04:29 ameeda mriedem: now the commit message have those 2 lines
20:04:30 ameeda (cherry picked from commit eba33a0e2d8aace6fbc889026fb80dc2c208bc8d) (cherry picked from commit c0aca1d333628f9174e8db53674787e281e7e0d7)
20:05:51 mriedem ameeda: those should go on separate lines
20:05:52 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: debug nova-api service version check during boot from volume https://review.openstack.org/540992
20:05:53 mriedem but that's ine
20:05:55 mriedem fine
20:08:13 mriedem dansmith: we haven't been doing proper service version checking in nova-api since pike https://review.openstack.org/#/c/539755/ - should be an easy +W
20:08:21 ameeda mriedem: yes they are , so I can do git review now ?
20:08:27 mriedem ameeda: yes
20:08:42 ameeda mriedem: Thank you !!
20:09:15 openstackgerrit Ameed Ashour proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: add "--until-complete" option for nova-manage db archive_deleted_rows. https://review.openstack.org/540274
20:09:51 ameeda mriedem: could you please give me +2 here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/528385/ :$
20:10:10 melwitt jaypipes: replied
20:12:11 mriedem ameeda: your ocata backport is wrong
20:14:05 ameeda I see
20:23:27 openstackgerrit Ameed Ashour proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: add "--until-complete" option for nova-manage db archive_deleted_rows. https://review.openstack.org/540274
20:27:42 ameeda mriedem: I don't know if I did the correct thing, please check it ^
20:28:33 mriedem ameeda: yes that's correct, thanks
20:29:53 ameeda Thank you !!
20:30:58 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add a nova-caching-scheduler job to the experimental queue https://review.openstack.org/539260
20:32:18 ameeda mriedem: please don't forget to review this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/528385/
20:56:55 mriedem efried: i think this might have broken the nova-next job but i'm not sure how https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/commit/49144e627120f9ec1cf72dfc84e02b9b81e669b6
20:56:59 mriedem https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1747511
20:56:59 openstack Launchpad bug 1747511 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "legacy-tempest-dsvm-neutron-nova-next-full fails with "Can not find requested image" since 1/31" [Undecided,New]
20:57:51 mriedem the only thing unique about the nova-next job at this point is it sets NOVA_USE_SERVICE_TOKEN=True in devstack
20:59:45 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Bump compute RPC API to version 5.0 https://review.openstack.org/541005
20:59:49 dansmith gawd
21:00:00 mriedem ufta
21:06:58 efried mriedem: Is the bustage consistent?
21:07:15 mriedem efried: yeah, 100% fail
21:07:48 efried mriedem: I can propose reversion of the above, then a blank nova patch that Depends-On it, and see if that at least makes it pass. Shall I?
21:08:03 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: debug nova-next image not found failures https://review.openstack.org/541008
21:08:18 mriedem i think we could also just ignore the service_user config in nova as a test
21:08:43 efried I have to jet for a doc appt right now, will catch up with you in an hour or so.
21:12:18 jaypipes thx melwitt
21:15:05 openstackgerrit melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: Add release note for Aggregate[Core|Ram|Disk]Filter change https://review.openstack.org/541013
21:16:25 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: debug nova-next image not found failures https://review.openstack.org/541008
21:30:42 openstackgerrit melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add release note for Aggregate[Core|Ram|Disk]Filter change https://review.openstack.org/541018
21:48:14 mriedem maciejjozefczyk: not sure why you'd +1 this :) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/540992/
21:50:32 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: debug nova-api service version check during boot from volume https://review.openstack.org/540992
21:56:19 openstackgerrit Matthew Edmonds proposed openstack/nova master: Clarify CONF.scheduler.max_attempts https://review.openstack.org/541031
21:56:46 edmondsw_ edleafe noticed this after reading your blog ^
21:59:31 edmondsw mriedem do we have a more general term that encompasses create, resize, and migrate if "build" doesn't do that?
22:02:38 mriedem scheduling?
22:02:41 mriedem like it said
22:02:42 edmondsw we can't say "schedule", because we only talk to the scheduler once.
22:03:26 melwitt it's still scheduling though, isn't it? trying alternate hosts *shrug*
22:03:42 edmondsw I guess
22:03:58 edmondsw at least the "for a chosen host" bit from the old help text is wrong, right?
22:04:09 edleafe mriedem: I think the problematic wording is "for a chosen host". But that was wrong before, too.
22:04:14 edleafe jinx
22:04:28 edmondsw edleafe yeah that is what first caught my eye
22:04:42 mriedem yes 'for a chosen host' is wrong
22:04:46 edmondsw I can change it back to scheduling and correct that part
22:05:27 edleafe "for a given VM build/move operation"
22:06:07 edmondsw I like that...
22:06:09 mriedem can we somehow make this about ironic and say, 'for a given bm movement'
22:06:32 edleafe nah, that sounds kinda crappy
22:06:33 edmondsw lol
22:07:43 openstackgerrit Matthew Edmonds proposed openstack/nova master: Clarify CONF.scheduler.max_attempts https://review.openstack.org/541031
22:08:15 efried mriedem: I have returned. Any update on the glance image snafu?
22:08:45 mriedem efried: debug patch is still running
22:08:53 jroll edleafe: "for a given VM b/m operation" :P
22:09:49 mriedem i can't wait to be in the vm bm room for 2 days in dublin
22:10:12 mriedem talking about...keystone
22:10:21 mriedem i came for the bm, stayed for the keystone
22:10:35 openstackgerrit Matthew Edmonds proposed openstack/nova master: Clarify CONF.scheduler.max_attempts https://review.openstack.org/541031
22:11:23 edleafe I'm SO glad I made it out of third grade
22:11:56 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Bump compute RPC API to version 5.0 https://review.openstack.org/541005
22:11:57 openstackgerrit Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Compute RPC client bump to 5.0 https://review.openstack.org/541035
22:12:06 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/pike: Query all cells for service version in _validate_bdm https://review.openstack.org/541036
22:13:23 mriedem efried: results http://logs.openstack.org/08/541008/2/check/legacy-tempest-dsvm-neutron-nova-next-full/f24c9d2/logs/screen-n-api.txt.gz?level=TRACE
22:15:02 efried mriedem: Looks to me like neither of your glance.py messages hit.
22:15:09 efried which is... weird.
22:15:53 openstackgerrit Matthew Edmonds proposed openstack/nova master: Clarify CONF.scheduler.max_attempts https://review.openstack.org/541031
22:16:49 mriedem http://logs.openstack.org/08/541008/2/check/legacy-tempest-dsvm-neutron-nova-next-full/f24c9d2/logs/screen-n-api.txt.gz#_Feb_05_21_46_51_455934
22:16:53 mriedem Using glance API servers: [u'http://158.69.92.100/image/v2/']
22:17:49 efried mriedem: http://logs.openstack.org/08/541008/2/check/legacy-tempest-dsvm-neutron-nova-next-full/f24c9d2/logs/screen-g-api.txt.gz#_Feb_05_21_46_51_651885
22:17:55 mriedem efried: maybe the image exists but the context doesn't have auth to GET it?
22:18:06 efried mriedem: This is https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-glanceclient/+bug/1707995
22:18:07 openstack Launchpad bug 1707995 in Glance Client "Can't use versioned endpoints" [Undecided,New]
22:18:18 mriedem shazbot!
22:18:27 efried Though I thought we weren't subject to that with this set of changes.
22:18:58 mriedem not sure why the other jobs wouldn't be failing though
22:19:23 efried Also checked this through the CI six ways from sunday before we merged it.
22:19:46 mriedem devstack doesn't run nova-next
22:19:52 efried So some weird combo of environments - or possibly a recent "fix" in ksa? - is exposing this.
22:20:13 mriedem i can try to nuke the usage of the service_user in this debug patch and see if things start magically passing
22:20:20 efried mriedem: No, but I made DNM nova patches with Depends-On the devstack change, exactly to validate this.
22:20:28 mriedem nova-next is also non-voting
22:20:37 mriedem so might not have noticed
22:20:42 efried oh, so maybe it failed and I neve.. yeah
22:21:05 jroll so GET /servers has a "created_at" query parameter to filter by created date... but sounds like that's an "equal to" filter, is there a way to communicate that I want before or after there?
22:21:46 efried mriedem: Could also do as I suggested above, put up a reversion of the devstack patch with an empty nova patch that Depends-On it, see if adding back the explicit endpoint also fixes it.
22:23:10 mriedem jroll: don't thin kso

Earlier   Later