| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-11-27 | |||
| 15:27:17 | artom | Premature Carriage Return Syndrome | |
| 15:27:40 | kashyap | artom: ... is part of a larger work item that needs cleaning up of assumptions about machine types in Nova. And coordinating w/ relevant libvirt work | |
| 15:28:04 | kashyap | artom: Heh | |
| 15:38:03 | mriedem | mdbooth: what's the difference between the 'disk' and 'disk.local' entries in the block_device_info disk 'mapping' entry? | |
| 15:38:17 | mdbooth | mriedem: 'disk' is the root disk | |
| 15:38:33 | mdbooth | 'disk.local' is legacy, and no longer generated | |
| 15:38:53 | mdbooth | But it used to be the single ephemeral disk | |
| 15:38:54 | mriedem | unless... | |
| 15:39:06 | mdbooth | Now we have disk.eph0, disk.eph1, etc | |
| 15:39:11 | mriedem | if we have code for it, we must support it somehow... | |
| 15:39:18 | mriedem | is it for bdmv1? | |
| 15:39:27 | mriedem | or just really old bdm records in the db? | |
| 15:39:46 | mdbooth | It's a long time since I've checked the details on this, but I recall convincing myself in the past the current code can't generate this | |
| 15:39:49 | mdbooth | Yeah, it's old BDM records | |
| 16:10:02 | mriedem | mdbooth: comments inline https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578846/ | |
| 16:14:34 | mriedem | dansmith: efried: mdbooth: i'd like to move forward with getting this evacuate-related bug fixed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/606122/ - i think the open question was do we use dansmith's more generic solution https://review.openstack.org/#/c/575190/ or keep my "tactical" fix for backports and then rebase dan's on top to replace my specific fix with the generic one | |
| 16:15:11 | mriedem | because that's holding up getting us to do evacuate testing with both rbd and lvm backends https://review.openstack.org/#/c/604400/ | |
| 16:18:36 | dansmith | mriedem: if you'll do the rebase of mine and cleanup of this spot after we merge yours that's fine | |
| 16:18:49 | dansmith | I would backport my generic solution too, but if you don't want to that's fine | |
| 16:20:32 | mdbooth | mriedem: ^^^ wfm. | |
| 16:23:04 | mriedem | dansmith: ack will do | |
| 16:29:17 | efried | I'll need to reread everything to refresh my memory of what's going on here. | |
| 16:33:38 | efried | so wait, which are we doing? just dan's thing, master & backports; or matt's thing for backports and dan's thing for master? | |
| 16:35:06 | dansmith | we're doing whichever of those mriedem wants | |
| 16:35:14 | dansmith | which I think is the latter | |
| 16:35:21 | mriedem | the latter | |
| 16:36:15 | efried | okay, so my job is to +2 mriedem's patch (done) and then wait for mdbooth to be satisfied with dansmith's patch before reviewing it. | |
| 16:37:18 | dansmith | efried: I think the -1 on mine isn't actually a thing | |
| 16:39:04 | efried | yeah, but I'm drowning, so looking for any excuse to defer | |
| 16:41:31 | mdbooth | dansmith: It's not a thing? | |
| 16:41:39 | dansmith | mdbooth: the security groups thing? | |
| 16:42:27 | mdbooth | dansmith: Yeah. IIRC I would have been happy with a command saying: # We broke this, but we don't care because it's not a thing any more. | |
| 16:42:38 | mdbooth | s/comment | |
| 16:43:10 | dansmith | I don't understand why it's a thing at all anyway.. if the instance is deleted, we're not going to do anything with the security groups we do fetch out of the db (if there are any anyway), | |
| 16:43:21 | dansmith | and, in any case where we did load the instance with a deleted=yes context, | |
| 16:43:24 | dansmith | we'd have gotten the same | |
| 16:44:55 | dansmith | so the only case where we'd do something different is where we had an instance, which wasn't deleted when we started, but was deleted underneath us and we go to lazy-load security groups.. if we were to go on and save that instance later, it'd fail and I can't think of anything else we'd do with it that would trigger some different behavior than we have now | |
| 16:45:01 | dansmith | which I think was also mriedem's reply | |
| 16:47:03 | mriedem | i was specifically worried about instance.services but mel said it was something else there | |
| 16:47:12 | mriedem | i.e. the bug she was working on | |
| 16:47:48 | mdbooth | dansmith: I think think so. I think the bug is that if you've got an instance which isn't deleted and you lazy load security groups, you get deleted security groups. I don't think you need to delete the instance in between or anything. | |
| 16:47:56 | mdbooth | s/think think/don't think/ | |
| 16:48:47 | mdbooth | dansmith: But we only care about that if we care about nova security groups, which IIUC are nova-network only. | |
| 16:49:59 | mriedem | they are nova-net only | |
| 16:50:07 | dansmith | mdbooth: ah, right, I remember you clarifying this again post initial review | |
| 16:50:25 | dansmith | they're n-net only, and don't work with cellsv1, right? so we really shouldn't have any supported cases where they're there anymore | |
| 16:51:00 | mriedem | so, | |
| 16:51:21 | mriedem | SecurityGroup.get_by_instance calls db api security_group_get_by_instance which hard-codes read_deleted="no" | |
| 16:51:33 | mriedem | *SecurityGroupList.get_by_instance | |
| 16:51:44 | mriedem | so isn't the hard-coding in the DB API preventing that | |
| 16:52:47 | dansmith | oh does it? | |
| 16:53:08 | mdbooth | mriedem: Looks like I missed that. That's convenient :) | |
| 16:53:13 | dansmith | sure does | |
| 16:57:15 | sean-k-mooney | speaking of things in nova net the function that enables trusted vfs was added to the nova net module | |
| 16:57:15 | dansmith | recorded for posterity | |
| 16:57:32 | sean-k-mooney | it proably should be moved to an sriov plugin in os-vif | |
| 16:59:01 | sean-k-mooney | specifically https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/c6218428e9b29a2c52808ec7d27b4b21aadc0299/nova/network/linux_net.py#L1773 should be moved | |
| 17:00:43 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: by the way i havent forgot about looking into can we remove NeutronLinuxBridgeInterfaceDriver too but i havent got around to it yet either | |
| 17:01:17 | mriedem | ken'ichi says it's ok https://review.openstack.org/#/c/616995/ | |
| 17:01:33 | mdbooth | mriedem: Going back a patch, I was wondering about adding an 'intent' to driver.cleanup and/or driver.destroy, i.e. driver.destroy(reason=MIGRATION|DELETE). We currently have destroy_disks, but the problem with this is that we second guess it in ComputeManager, which makes it basically useless. | |
| 17:02:22 | mdbooth | What we want the driver to do is, for delete: delete everything. For migrate/evacuate: delete everything local to this hypervisor. | |
| 17:03:03 | mdbooth | I think the definition of 'local to the hypervisor' is more cleanly defined internally by the hypervisor. | |
| 17:03:05 | slaweq | hi nova cores, can You take alook at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/619061/ - it should fix neutron-tempest-postgres-full periodic job in gate so it's quite important for us :) | |
| 17:03:08 | slaweq | thx in advance | |
| 17:03:27 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: oh ok cool i think there is more in that file we are not using that we could remove too | |
| 17:03:56 | mriedem | mdbooth: i don't expect you'll get much in the way of replies on that in the ML | |
| 17:04:08 | mriedem | people, like me, will likely say they don't want to think about it | |
| 17:04:25 | mdbooth | mriedem: It's a source of a class of real bugs, thoough | |
| 17:04:26 | mriedem | mdbooth: so having said that, i assume you aren't proposing to change your current fix to incorporate that right? | |
| 17:04:32 | mriedem | mdbooth: oh i don't doubt it | |
| 17:04:34 | mdbooth | mriedem: Hell, no | |
| 17:04:55 | mdbooth | mriedem: I was thinking about lyarwood's original proposal to fix an extra thing in my patch | |
| 17:04:58 | mriedem | there is definitely a russian roulette of disk deletion in compute/virt | |
| 17:05:16 | mdbooth | I looked harder at that, and I don't think we can fix it like that | |
| 17:07:42 | openstackgerrit | Jack Ding proposed openstack/nova master: Improve libvirt image and snapshot handling https://review.openstack.org/616692 | |
| 17:12:03 | openstackgerrit | Jack Ding proposed openstack/nova-specs master: [WIP] Flavor Extra Spec and Image Properties Validation https://review.openstack.org/618542 | |
| 17:14:48 | mdbooth | mriedem: Practically speaking, what would be the most practical way to go about making that sort of change? Just post a patch? Problem is it wouldn't be a small amount of work, so I'd be cautious of that without some level of buy in beforehand. BP? | |
| 17:17:19 | mriedem | bp doesn't give you much in the way of details, spec allows you to really write the details down and get review on it without getting too far into implementation, but idk | |
| 17:17:47 | mriedem | gonna be a hard sell to get people to want to spend time/brain power on this | |
| 17:38:15 | sean-k-mooney | mdbooth: blueprints tend to be more for tracking then design if you want input you will want a spec or at least a etherpad + hangout if you have a quorum of people that are interested | |
| 17:44:07 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Fix InstanceNotFound during _destroy_evacuated_instances https://review.openstack.org/606122 | |
| 17:44:07 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Refactor TestEvacuateDeleteServerRestartOriginalCompute https://review.openstack.org/608705 | |
| 17:44:08 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Always read-deleted=yes on lazy-load https://review.openstack.org/575190 | |
| 17:44:08 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Run evacuate tests with local/lvm and shared/rbd storage https://review.openstack.org/604400 | |
| 17:44:21 | mriedem | dansmith: rebasearoo | |
| 17:45:53 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Run against mriedem's evacuate test https://review.openstack.org/604423 | |
| 17:49:16 | openstackgerrit | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Re-propose numa-aware-live-migration spec https://review.openstack.org/599587 | |
| 17:49:54 | artom | mriedem, ^^ I think I got everything, when you have a moment | |
| 17:51:16 | mriedem | ok | |
| 17:52:38 | artom | (Oh and the docstring patch as well) | |
| 17:52:47 | artom | But that's not as important | |
| 17:52:50 | bauzas | mriedem: artom: I'll try to look at this spec tomorrow | |
| 17:52:58 | artom | woot | |
| 17:53:03 | artom | Cheers bauzas! | |
| 17:55:03 | bauzas | artom: before cheering me, wait for my comments :) | |
| 17:55:26 | artom | I have 100% confidence they'll be constructive and useful. | |
| 17:55:47 | artom | Why no, my nose isn't brown, whydja ask? ;) | |
| 19:06:27 | mriedem | artom: dansmith: there you go https://review.openstack.org/#/c/599587/ | |
| 19:40:16 | artom | mriedem, thank you! | |
| 19:41:37 | mriedem | belmoreira: hey, remember talking in berlin about a problem where if you have a lot of disabled computes for an upgrade, but with max_placement_results set low, you could get novalidhost because placement returns all disabled computes? you were going to open a bug for that but i never saw one. | |