| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-04-06 | |||
| 00:21:08 | cfriesen_ | eandersson: crazy question maybe, but did you live-migrate any of these pinned instances? | |
| 00:21:26 | eandersson | nope | |
| 00:21:34 | eandersson | I created a lab and 5 new VMs. | |
| 00:21:41 | eandersson | with two computes | |
| 00:22:07 | eandersson | evacuated the two vms on compute2 | |
| 00:24:37 | eandersson | > Lock "compute_resources" acquired by "nova.compute.resource_tracker.rebuild_claim" | |
| 00:28:26 | cfriesen_ | eandersson: that's promising, it corresponds to the locking decorator on ResourceTracker.rebuild_claim | |
| 00:31:10 | cfriesen_ | eandersson: just had a thought...what virt driver are you using? | |
| 00:32:16 | cfriesen_ | eandersson: do you see a log like "Virt driver does not support 'get_available_resource'. Compute tracking is disabled." ? | |
| 00:34:07 | eandersson | nope | |
| 00:35:54 | eandersson | cfriesen_, default kvm | |
| 00:47:59 | eandersson | libvirt, qemu-kvm | |
| 01:31:37 | melwitt | logan-: here's the link http://logs.openstack.org/84/534384/24/check/tempest-full/ae551f8/ | |
| 01:58:28 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Remove non-libguestfs file injection for libvirt https://review.openstack.org/324720 | |
| 02:34:26 | gmann | alex_xu_: ping | |
| 02:45:22 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in unit/virt/xenapi/test_vm_utils.py (3) https://review.openstack.org/559258 | |
| 04:36:59 | homeski | is osprofiler working in Nova --Newton? | |
| 04:37:09 | homeski | can't find any docs on it .. | |
| 04:53:30 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in test_user_data.py https://review.openstack.org/559264 | |
| 05:23:50 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in unit/api/openstack/compute/test_hosts.py https://review.openstack.org/559266 | |
| 05:45:57 | openstackgerrit | Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in unit/api/*/test_instance_actions.py https://review.openstack.org/559269 | |
| 06:53:42 | openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/nova master: Imported Translations from Zanata https://review.openstack.org/548772 | |
| 07:11:34 | kashyap | zigo: Thanks. Will look in a few. | |
| 07:19:18 | openstackgerrit | Roman Dobosz proposed openstack/nova master: Pass hosts or nodes to HostStates update method depending on a driver. https://review.openstack.org/556761 | |
| 07:19:18 | openstackgerrit | Roman Dobosz proposed openstack/nova master: Added weight for aggregate soft (anti) affinity. https://review.openstack.org/556762 | |
| 07:19:19 | openstackgerrit | Roman Dobosz proposed openstack/nova master: Added node field for InstanceGroup objects https://review.openstack.org/559284 | |
| 08:32:00 | kaisers1 | mikal_: ping | |
| 08:46:27 | kashyap | It's often best to just ask the question -- when the person wakes up, they could respond directly to the question. | |
| 09:27:45 | openstackgerrit | Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: Cleanup patch for the cell-disable series https://review.openstack.org/559299 | |
| 09:34:25 | openstackgerrit | Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add missing encryption_secret_uuid tests https://review.openstack.org/540679 | |
| 09:44:38 | kashyap | zigo: Hi there | |
| 09:45:18 | kashyap | zigo: I'm just about to respond to your email, although it's easy to use the versions in Stretch | |
| 09:45:33 | zigo | kashyap: Great ! :) | |
| 09:45:38 | kashyap | zigo: Thanks for the compilation trying; it looks like a fairly small one. | |
| 09:46:04 | kashyap | zigo: But -- it would be nice to use 3.2.0, as I just spent 30 minutes comparing the release notes of 3.0.0 and 3.2.0 | |
| 09:46:06 | zigo | As I wrote, right now, not much of a problem. In a year from now, I don't know ! | |
| 09:46:22 | zigo | kashyap: Oh, interesting. What's the added features? | |
| 09:46:23 | kashyap | That's why instead of such new versions from Buster / Sid | |
| 09:46:57 | kashyap | zigo: So, one of the core things we'd get with 3.2.0 is this: | |
| 09:47:21 | kashyap | zigo: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2017-February/msg01295.html -- "Detect host CPU model by askingQEMU on x86_64" | |
| 09:47:36 | kashyap | zigo: It fixes a ton of bugs in that area of CPU model comparision | |
| 09:47:47 | zigo | Oh ... | |
| 09:47:51 | zigo | I see, interesting indeed. | |
| 09:48:35 | zigo | Though that's bugs in libvirt itself, not really a new API feature, right? | |
| 09:49:01 | kashyap | zigo: Yes, indeed | |
| 09:49:09 | kashyap | zigo: Bug hang on, let me look at the details | |
| 09:49:55 | zigo | What I was refering was missing feature on the way of the enhancement of Nova. | |
| 09:49:57 | kashyap | zigo: Some new APIs too | |
| 09:50:44 | zigo | Is there any incompatibilities? | |
| 09:51:32 | zigo | If there are bugfixes, then I can try to do my best to get the latest version from Buster backported. But that's a whole of a different story to have this backport being mandatory because of API breaks. | |
| 09:51:33 | kashyap | zigo: That's a broad question, you mean API incompat? | |
| 09:51:36 | kashyap | zigo: No, not really | |
| 09:51:38 | zigo | Yeah... | |
| 09:52:03 | kashyap | zigo: Isn't it too much to backport the 'Buster' versions? Rather than introducing the bit more conservative 3.2.0 and 2.9.0 (QEMU)? | |
| 09:52:15 | zigo | If 3.2.0 is still backward compatible with 3.0.0, then just require 3.0.0 and I'll do what I can to get the backport done. It's just nicer to not have it mandatory. | |
| 09:52:30 | kashyap | zigo: libvirt guarantees API compatibility "forever" | |
| 09:52:35 | zigo | Oh ! | |
| 09:52:42 | zigo | So why are you willing to even require anything? | |
| 09:53:13 | kashyap | Wait, let me retract that :-) | |
| 09:53:26 | kashyap | Read here about API guarantees: https://libvirt.org/support.html | |
| 09:54:12 | zigo | Another thing: isn't Nova only interested in the python-libvirt API, rather than the engine behind? | |
| 09:54:12 | kashyap | zigo: I meant, the "forever" part applies to ABI compatibility from the primary public API | |
| 09:55:05 | zigo | " IOW they will be ABI compatible forever." <--- Read this, indeed ! | |
| 09:55:34 | zigo | That's the Linux kernel userland API policy (though here, ABI, which is even nicer). | |
| 09:55:38 | kashyap | zigo: Each Compute node runs libvirt daemon | |
| 09:56:19 | zigo | Linuz told Debian folks (at Debconf in portland) that he didn't understand why it wasn't a common practice on all the Linux echosystem, and I very much agree ! :) | |
| 09:58:00 | zigo | Ok, so libvirt C lib is super-stable, but is there anything new in 3.2.0 that you would need that isn't in 3.0.0 ? | |
| 09:59:05 | kashyap | zigo: Yeah, like I said 3.2.0 libvirt (in conjunction with QEMU 2.9.0) by default saves a ton of headache in the CPU modelling area | |
| 10:02:03 | kashyap | zigo: But if it's too much time and effort, it's alright, can settle on 3.0.0 & 2.8.0 | |
| 10:04:10 | zigo | Great, thanks. Just do that, and advise for 3.0.0, then I'll keep in mind that backporting is prefered. | |
| 10:04:38 | zigo | The real issue isn't "too much effort", right now, it's not. The issue is: I don't know if it's going to be hard or even impossible in one year from now. | |
| 10:04:54 | zigo | Anyway, thanks so much for your care. | |
| 10:07:23 | kashyap | zigo: Email sent. | |
| 10:26:55 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/nova master: Move test_report_client out of placement namespace https://review.openstack.org/558911 | |
| 11:58:43 | kashyap | Anyone also seeing these timeout issues: | |
| 11:58:43 | kashyap | http://logs.openstack.org/84/534384/24/check/neutron-tempest-multinode-full/594b6f8/job-output.txt.gz#_2018-04-06_05_44_18_306935 | |
| 12:01:36 | efried | kashyap: Things have been pretty flaky the last couple of days. I haven't been paying close enough attention to say whether it's that same issue over and over, but could very well be. | |
| 12:01:43 | efried | I bet mriedem knows more. | |
| 12:03:35 | kashyap | I just wanted to be mindful before I blindly hit 'recheck' | |
| 12:06:40 | cdent | efried, edleafe : a) what day is it? b) do either of you recall what the state of multiple member_of params is? | |
| 12:07:09 | jroll | kashyap: there's been something about a certain provider giving lots of timeouts | |
| 12:07:19 | kashyap | jroll: Ah, I see. | |
| 12:07:34 | kashyap | That explains the 'recheck's by others while I was asleep | |
| 12:08:36 | fried_rice | a) Thanks cdent; b) Spec merged: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/555413/ original series nearing completion, new work not started. | |
| 12:08:41 | fried_rice | as far as I know. | |
| 12:08:43 | jroll | ah yes, limestone, which is the provider for that job | |
| 12:09:03 | cdent | thanks fried_rice | |
| 12:09:23 | fried_rice | cdent: Original bp topic https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/alloc-candidates-member-of+(status:open+OR+status:merged) | |
| 12:09:59 | cdent | yeah, had that, was more a question of "is someone on the hook for that?" | |
| 12:14:13 | fried_rice | cdent: Not sure, actually. Either dansmith or edleafe I would imagine. | |
| 12:14:41 | cdent | fried_rice: I've noted the need for someone in the weekly report | |
| 12:14:51 | fried_rice | ack | |
| 12:53:39 | mriedem | arvindn05: dansmith: i just thought of something fun with the image-based traits spec, | |
| 12:53:50 | mriedem | if we rebuild with a new image that has some required traits on it, | |
| 12:54:05 | mriedem | will we run through placement during scheduling again? | |
| 12:54:12 | mriedem | i.e. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/546357/ | |
| 12:54:52 | mriedem | we flagged our individual filters on what can run during rebuild based on quantitative resources or not, but traits on the image would be...qualitative? | |
| 12:59:12 | mriedem | arvindn05: i left a comment in the spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/541507/9/specs/rocky/approved/glance-image-traits.rst@151 - we'll likely need an amendment for that | |
| 13:01:56 | ArchiFleKs | Hi, I have a weird issue, on a compute node I cannot launch nova-compute, I tried "/openstack/venvs/nova-16.0.10/bin/python -v /openstack/venvs/nova-16.0.10/bin/nova-compute --debug" manually and it just exit, I have no log on the nova side, just python loading : http://paste.openstack.org/show/718596/ (I'm running openstack-ansible) | |
| 13:03:56 | figleaf | cdent: fried_rice: I believe that dansmith was working on that | |