| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-10-04 | |||
| 12:29:00 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yes, parent_rp_uuid is in the summary part | |
| 12:29:15 | gibi | s/parent_rp_uuid/parent_provider_uuid | |
| 12:29:25 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: yeah, it's in the provider_summaries part of the response, not the allocation_requests part of the response, which is what I was alluding to above. | |
| 12:29:54 | sean-k-mooney | so in the delete case nova now needs to delete the allocation from all resouce providers in the list instead of just one delete | |
| 12:30:04 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney, gibi: and we don't pass the provider_summaries response to the claim_resources() method (only the allocation_request part) which is why I was asking about that comment from gibi on the claim_resources() patch. | |
| 12:30:20 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: exactly. It is implemented in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/606050/ | |
| 12:30:21 | sean-k-mooney | i assume there is no api to say delete all allocation for this consumer uuid? | |
| 12:30:41 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: there is, yes. | |
| 12:30:53 | cdent | 2 even | |
| 12:31:05 | jaypipes | cdent: touche :) | |
| 12:31:12 | sean-k-mooney | so in that case for a delete cant nova just do that and pass the instance uuid? | |
| 12:31:18 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: it is complicated if the consumer has allocations on other computes as well | |
| 12:31:42 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: and it is the case for evacuate :/ | |
| 12:31:54 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: sure it can. the issue is edge cases... gibi's func test patch outlines those cases well. lemme grab you a link. | |
| 12:32:24 | gibi | jaypipes: I think I'm failing to grasp what is exactly your suggestion for claim_resources() call | |
| 12:32:27 | mrch_ | https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1763043 ( Instance not resizing, skipping migration.) well its not unnecessary because 70% of them have locked nova/cinder disk, got around a dozend of them any ideas, excetp "rbd lock remove" till the end of my life? | |
| 12:32:27 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1763043 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Unnecessary "Instance not resizing, skipping migration" warning in n-cpu logs during live migration" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Matt Riedemann (mriedem) | |
| 12:32:53 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: for evacuate would we not use a migration uuid to hold the dest allocations and then not delete the source allocation and swap it over like we do for cold migrate? | |
| 12:33:14 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: that would be ideal, but does not happen today | |
| 12:33:15 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: see very bottom of this file: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/604084/3/nova/tests/functional/test_servers.py | |
| 12:33:17 | sean-k-mooney | im really not familar enough with this code unfortuenetly | |
| 12:33:26 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I have a todo from the PTG to improve that as well | |
| 12:33:35 | jaypipes | sean-k-mooney: those tests and comments from gibi highlight well the issue. | |
| 12:33:39 | jaypipes | issues... | |
| 12:35:41 | bauzas | jaypipes: flush the toilets | |
| 12:35:50 | sean-k-mooney | jaypipes i have no doubt gibi has reasoned about this and the edgecase far better then i :) espcially since i jsut stared looking at the patch but ya just providing my assumtions in case that help with any that might have been made :) my assumetion of how this should work likely diverge hevily form how it does | |
| 12:36:02 | gibi | jaypipes: there is stuctural change between 1.12-1.28 but there is no strucutral change when we step from 1.28 to 1.29 in a_c but I don't know what you want to suggest | |
| 12:37:46 | jaypipes | gibi: I was questioning the need to "pin" the claim_resources() API microversion to 1.29 since there was no change to the allocation_request part of the a_c response. | |
| 12:39:14 | gibi | jaypipes: sure claim_resources can work with 1.28 even if a_c used 1.29. I think we are not even bumping claim_resources to 1.29 when we bump a_c to 1.29 | |
| 12:39:57 | gibi | jaypipes: this path bumps a_c to 1.29 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/585672 but not the claim_resources | |
| 12:41:13 | jaypipes | gibi: k, cool. | |
| 12:41:41 | jaypipes | gibi: again, I was just responding to your comments on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/583667/25/nova/scheduler/client/report.py where you said this: | |
| 12:41:42 | jaypipes | "Therefore scheduler passes down >= 1.29 when calling claim_resources with the selected allocation candidate. So by supporting nested a_c we implicitly force nova to at least support 1.29 >= in claim_resources too. " | |
| 12:42:11 | jaypipes | gibi: but, no worries, I'll stop bothering you and get back to reviewing the last revision in that patch :) | |
| 12:42:30 | gibi | jaypipes: so you suggets to drop the logic that passes version from a_c to claim_resources? | |
| 12:42:51 | jaypipes | gibi: yeah, might be useful... | |
| 12:42:53 | gibi | jaypipes: that logic is the one that forces claim_resources to adapt to 1.29 | |
| 12:43:06 | jaypipes | gibi: since technically there's nothing about 1.29 that affects claim_resources. | |
| 12:43:34 | jaypipes | gibi: and the allocation_request_version that gets passed to claim_resources() is all about the structure of the allocation_request part of the payload. | |
| 12:43:57 | jaypipes | gibi: but it's really not a huge deal :) | |
| 12:44:05 | gibi | jaypipes: jeah for 1.29 we don't need that but for the bump of 1.12 - 1.28 we need to know that the a_c was used with 1.28 | |
| 12:44:10 | jaypipes | gibi: like I said, I'll go back to my last revision review :) | |
| 12:44:30 | gibi | jaypipes: I let you review :) | |
| 12:44:48 | jaypipes | gibi: elnézést a zavarásért! | |
| 12:45:38 | jaypipes | I imagine gibi laughing at Google Translate's poor translation | |
| 12:45:58 | gibi | jaypipes: what was the English expression you translated? | |
| 12:46:01 | gibi | :) | |
| 12:46:05 | jaypipes | "Sorry to bother" | |
| 12:46:08 | jaypipes | lol | |
| 12:46:18 | jaypipes | what does it mean? :) | |
| 12:46:32 | jaypipes | "Happy cows love coding" or something wacky like that? | |
| 12:47:57 | gibi | no it is not that far | |
| 12:50:27 | gibi | jaypipes: what you used is more for the case when you want to approach a stranger, e.g. as a first sentence before you ask for direction | |
| 12:51:03 | gibi | so it is super polite | |
| 12:51:52 | gibi | but yeah you basically asked for forgiveness for the interruption | |
| 12:52:06 | gibi | so the intention is clear | |
| 12:54:42 | jaypipes | hehe | |
| 12:58:43 | bauzas | jaypipes: gibi: https://www.duolingo.com/course/hu/en/ | |
| 12:58:57 | bauzas | I did that for German \o/ | |
| 12:59:21 | bauzas | und jetzt I spreche Deutch | |
| 12:59:25 | bauzas | Ich* | |
| 13:00:10 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: if you ever want to lean a languge that no one will under stand they have an irish course too | |
| 13:03:23 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I saw this | |
| 13:03:33 | bauzas | there is also High Valeryan and Klingon | |
| 13:06:54 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: both are proably more useful then irish that said it was nice to have a language you could use to gossip about people abroad on school trips lol only use of irish i have ever had | |
| 13:07:03 | efried | jetzt spreche ich <== with an adjective in the mix, you put the verb before the subject. Or something. | |
| 13:07:27 | efried | or whatever "jetzt" is, not an adjective | |
| 13:22:10 | jaypipes | gibi: +2 from me on claim_resources(). I will let efried or mriedem +W. | |
| 13:22:45 | gibi | jaypipes: thanks a lot. efried had a bunch of comments so I feel he is the one who can +W it | |
| 13:31:10 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Refactor allocation checking in functional tests https://review.openstack.org/607287 | |
| 13:31:10 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Run ServerMovingTests with nested resources https://review.openstack.org/604084 | |
| 13:31:11 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Ignore forcing of live migration for nested instance https://review.openstack.org/605785 | |
| 13:31:11 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Consider nested allocations during allocation cleanup https://review.openstack.org/606050 | |
| 13:31:12 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Ignore forcing of evacuation for nested instance https://review.openstack.org/606111 | |
| 13:31:12 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Run negative server moving tests with nested RPs https://review.openstack.org/604125 | |
| 13:33:20 | gibi | bauzas: FYI, the nested series now up to date all the way to the top https://review.openstack.org/#/c/604125/ | |
| 13:43:19 | openstackgerrit | Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Refactor scatter-gather utility to return exception objects https://review.openstack.org/607934 | |
| 13:50:13 | openstackgerrit | Jack Ding proposed openstack/nova master: Handle missing marker during online data migration https://review.openstack.org/605164 | |
| 14:02:19 | dansmith | did I miss that the meeting this week was canceled or something? | |
| 14:03:06 | gibi | dansmith: I think I did not get a request from melwitt to chair it but I can | |
| 14:03:25 | dansmith | meh | |
| 14:03:26 | gmann | not sure. I was also checking meeting channel | |
| 14:03:32 | efried | we have an important topic to discuss, HPET for libvirt. | |
| 14:03:34 | bauzas | hah, I just asked the question in -meeting | |
| 14:03:36 | efried | they're expecting it. | |
| 14:03:45 | bauzas | efried: and what about HCATTLE ? | |
| 14:03:56 | efried | oy vay | |
| 14:04:06 | sean-k-mooney | efried: so #openstack-meeting time i guess | |
| 14:04:24 | efried | yup | |
| 14:11:10 | mrch_ | can i prevent the nova.compute.resource_tracker spaming this: nova.compute.resource_tracker [req-e23cf459-506f-42d3-ac5d-73d87b1e5ba9 - - - - -] [instance: 8ecbbdb1-bad7-434b-8d09-265964ca9c7e] Instance not resizing, skipping migration. when 5 hosts spam this about one an the same vm, an i got 10 vms of that kind, its annoying as f | |
| 14:12:57 | efried | mrch_: We're in the nova meeting atm; can you ask again at the top of the hour? | |
| 14:13:43 | efried | It looks like this is happening because you have some stale migrations in the database; can you clean those up? | |
| 14:15:56 | mrch_ | efried | |
| 14:15:56 | mrch_ | efried: shure | |
| 14:18:05 | mrch_ | efried | |
| 14:18:06 | mrch_ | efried: concidering db, but i cant wait, i stay in chat just write ill see it tomorrow | |
| 14:18:50 | efried | mrch_: Okay. I personally don't know how to clean up the db, but hopefully one of the wizards can advise once the meeting is over. | |
| 14:58:22 | melwitt | gibi: thank you for running the nova meeting, it completely slipped my mind this time. apologies | |
| 15:00:26 | gibi | melwitt: no worries | |
| 15:00:35 | mhen | o/ | |