Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2018-05-25
15:27:32 leakypipes indeed.
15:30:42 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add granular policy rules for usages https://review.openstack.org/568706
15:30:43 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Follow up changes to granular placement policy reviews https://review.openstack.org/570588
15:31:59 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: mirror nova host aggregate members to placement https://review.openstack.org/553597
15:32:06 leakypipes hansmoleman: et voila. ^
15:35:23 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: mirror nova host aggregate members to placement https://review.openstack.org/553597
15:35:48 leakypipes hansmoleman: ty
15:35:59 hansmoleman np
15:36:23 leakypipes hansmoleman: it's amazing you can even see well enough to do reviews with those glasses on.
15:36:40 hansmoleman heh
15:37:13 hansmoleman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u4hoBXLKZs
15:38:27 hansmoleman time to meet treinish for breaky
15:47:34 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: get_inventory => update_provider_tree https://review.openstack.org/560444
23:43:36 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Follow up changes to granular placement policy reviews https://review.openstack.org/570588
23:43:37 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add granular placement policy rules for aggregates https://review.openstack.org/570621
23:43:41 mriedem lbragstad[m]: scope type in the aggregate patch ^
23:43:47 mriedem definitely tweet worthy!
#openstack-nova - 2018-05-26
00:48:07 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Follow up changes to granular placement policy reviews https://review.openstack.org/570588
00:48:08 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add granular policy rules for traits in placement https://review.openstack.org/570625
01:03:45 Kevin_Zheng ping mriedem
01:04:06 mriedem Kevin_Zheng: pong, but about to leave for dinner
01:05:04 Kevin_Zheng mriedem, Ok then enjoy your dinner, I will ask again monday :)
01:05:35 mriedem heh, i guess something very complicated
01:05:55 Kevin_Zheng yeah, about the abort live migration patch
01:06:00 mriedem uh oh
01:06:01 Kevin_Zheng lets do it monday
01:06:09 mriedem sure - we have monday off in the US btw
01:06:12 mriedem so tuesday :)
01:07:20 Kevin_Zheng sounds wednesday in China then :)
01:08:21 mriedem sure, or send me an email
01:08:25 mriedem ttyl
14:45:28 openstackgerrit huanhongda proposed openstack/nova stable/ocata: Remove soft-deleted instances from quota_usages https://review.openstack.org/570653
16:54:54 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Follow up changes to granular placement policy reviews https://review.openstack.org/570588
16:54:55 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add granular policy rules for placement allocations https://review.openstack.org/570655
16:54:56 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Add granular policy rules for allocation candidates https://review.openstack.org/570656
17:09:24 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Change exception type while deattaching root device https://review.openstack.org/570561
#openstack-nova - 2018-05-27
07:19:25 openstackgerrit Tetsuro Nakamura proposed openstack/nova master: Return all resources in provider_summaries https://review.openstack.org/558045
07:19:26 openstackgerrit Tetsuro Nakamura proposed openstack/nova master: Return all nested providers in tree https://review.openstack.org/559480
07:19:27 openstackgerrit Tetsuro Nakamura proposed openstack/nova master: Add microversion for nested allocation candidate https://review.openstack.org/565487
12:01:33 openstackgerrit Jay Pipes proposed openstack/nova master: mirror nova host aggregate members to placement https://review.openstack.org/553597
16:20:39 openstackgerrit hyunsik Yang proposed openstack/nova master: support pxe boot between the VM When Virtual machine which run on the OpenStack are used to deploy the cloud environment such as OPNFV, IPMI and PXE should operate well like as a physical server. https://review.openstack.org/570685
#openstack-nova - 2018-05-28
02:48:37 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in virt/test_block_device.py https://review.openstack.org/566153
04:36:36 openstackgerrit jichenjc proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: use local context https://review.openstack.org/570707
06:03:18 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in nova/tests/unit/virt/xenapi/stubs.py https://review.openstack.org/568412
07:59:44 openstackgerrit huanhongda proposed openstack/nova master: Filter out soft-deleted instances from quota_usages https://review.openstack.org/570736
08:07:36 openstackgerrit Lei Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Add method to get cpu traits https://review.openstack.org/560317
08:08:55 openstackgerrit huanhongda proposed openstack/nova master: Filter out soft-deleted instances from quota_usages https://review.openstack.org/570736
08:25:13 openstackgerrit Lei Zhang proposed openstack/nova master: Add method to get cpu traits https://review.openstack.org/560317
08:33:31 pvc Hi anyone can help me? After extending the volume it not taking effect on the instance side
08:33:58 pvc Kindly see this http://paste.openstack.org/show/722128/
08:59:42 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in libvirt/test_driver.py (4) https://review.openstack.org/570750
09:12:37 openstackgerrit Takashi NATSUME proposed openstack/nova master: Remove mox in nova/tests/unit/virt/xenapi/stubs.py https://review.openstack.org/568412
11:48:46 bhagyashris_ alex_xu: Hi,
12:12:18 bauzas oh shit, I forgot, it's Memorial Day in the US
12:12:33 bauzas US folks don't work today, right?
12:25:56 kashyap Yes
12:54:08 mnaser yeah it's a quiet day
13:36:53 aarents Hi Kevin_Zheng, thank you for reviewing this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/570528/1, I added a comment
14:03:32 bauzas FWIW, lots of people are either on PTO or in holidays
14:03:41 bauzas so let's defer the scheduler meeting till next week
14:20:09 stephenfin bauzas: I could get used to the quiet though :P
14:20:30 bauzas heh
14:20:46 bauzas I'm just not used to see this channel so quiet
14:20:53 bauzas so let's make random noises
14:37:09 bhagyashris eric-young: Hi,
15:48:53 cfriesen__ stephenfin: bauzas: if you're still on, I just had a thought. given that we *know* it's broken, should we consider preventing live migration with pinned CPUs, numa nodes, etc? Or is there enough history that we need to preserve the likely-broken current behaviour?
15:49:29 cfriesen I'm looking at Artom's WIP live-migration patches, and just had the above thought...
15:49:46 artom cfriesen, shoot
15:50:02 artom Oh
15:50:04 artom Hrmm
15:50:53 cfriesen artom: given that in the BP we're talking about preventing live migration unless it's "new enough" on both computes, should we just go ahead and block it now?
15:51:00 artom I feel explicitly saying "we can't do this" rather than doing it and potentially breaking the SLA we have in place (many:1 vCPU:pCPU pin mappings) is better
15:51:17 artom cfriesen, so, that patch is actually full done
15:51:22 artom Well - "done"
15:51:44 artom It's WIP because Matt asked me to move it above the "real work" patch, which is only in its very infancy
15:52:10 artom We could technically merge it as is - it's an "empty" service version bump, and a corresponding check in the conductor
15:52:36 artom But... historically, we've merged the "real work" patch first, and then the version checking
15:52:58 artom In any case, unless someone is running master in production, it doesn't really matter, since both patches will end up in the same release
15:53:05 cfriesen artom: yeah...I was just wondering about merging an unconditional "we can't live-migrate this" patch now, then refine the check later once we can actually do it
15:53:28 cfriesen artom: that assumes we actually merge the real one. :)
15:53:40 artom cfriesen, are you doubting my capabilities to push code through? ;)
15:54:03 artom sahid might know more about this, IIRC he had a thing similar to that: just block it for now, until we get the real solution in place
15:54:11 artom We ended up doing that downstream
15:54:22 cfriesen this functionality has been missing for so long, it's like the cursed behaviour or something. :)
15:54:30 artom Which... I mean, we found a bug in that, so, it's "fun" :)
15:55:01 artom We ended up doing that downstream because it got shut down upstream, I should clarify
15:55:09 cfriesen ah, okay.
15:55:09 artom .... this is all from memory, I may be waaay off
15:56:55 cfriesen anyway, I'm not strongly opinionated, just had a thought.
15:57:35 sahid cfriesen: we have a patch downstream so instead of changing guest pinning, we try to find a host which can handle it
15:59:02 sahid artom: is now working on a real solution so i think we should make all our efforts behind him
15:59:14 artom Wind in my sails baby
15:59:19 cfriesen sahid: if you've got enough compute nodes I could see that. We had to change the pinning because we support a hyperconverged dual-node configuration.
15:59:48 cfriesen sahid: for sure, I'm looking at artom's patches now.
15:59:56 sahid cfriesen: so you have to wait for artom's work i guess
16:00:21 sahid oh i did not know that, artom you already have some patches to review?
16:00:42 artom sahid, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/566723/8
16:00:46 artom And the two below
16:01:02 sahid artom: thanks
16:22:33 bhagyashris eric-young: hi,

Earlier   Later