| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-01-12 | |||
| 21:48:19 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Turn off rp association refresh in nova-next https://review.openstack.org/616033 | |
| 21:59:51 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Use a static resource tracker in compute manager https://review.openstack.org/620711 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2019-01-13 | |||
| 03:37:48 | openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/nova master: Use a static resource tracker in compute manager https://review.openstack.org/620711 | |
| 09:22:14 | openstackgerrit | garyk proposed openstack/nova master: Enhance exception raiased when invalid power state https://review.openstack.org/630496 | |
| 14:53:59 | openstackgerrit | garyk proposed openstack/nova master: Enhance exception raised when invalid power state https://review.openstack.org/630496 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2019-01-14 | |||
| 00:19:30 | eandersson | What kind of impact does getting additional filtering / weighting data have on scheduler performance? | |
| 00:19:54 | eandersson | e.g. flavor information | |
| 00:20:59 | eandersson | It's easy enough to test with a few computes and VMs, but not sure how to test it on more realistic PROD scales. | |
| 07:44:22 | openstackgerrit | Zhenyu Zheng proposed openstack/nova master: Allow run metadata api per cell https://review.openstack.org/624612 | |
| 08:05:56 | maciejjozefczyk | jaypipes: hey. I did a little update on counters here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/614167/ Please check that ;) Sorry for spamming a lot about this | |
| 11:48:59 | finucannot | bauzas: If you're about today, fancy pushing https://review.openstack.org/630154 and https://review.openstack.org/630138 ? | |
| 12:35:36 | jaypipes | maciejjozefczyk: no worries! will look at it shortly. | |
| 13:28:22 | sean-k-mooney | o/ | |
| 13:51:24 | gibi | mriedem: hi! welcome back! I'm trying to find a slot for a hangouts call about the bandwidth patches and need your input. Possible slots this week: Wednesday 18:00 UTC (after cdent's placement hangouts), Thursday 17:00 UTC, Friday 17:00 UTC | |
| 13:51:26 | openstackgerrit | Matthew Booth proposed openstack/nova master: Fix configure() called after DatabaseAtVersion fixture https://review.openstack.org/619723 | |
| 13:53:40 | gibi | mriedem: and one more not so good spot on Tuesday 17:00 UTC | |
| 13:55:07 | mriedem | any of those should work for me | |
| 13:56:47 | efried | n-sch meeting in 10 minutes in #openstack-meeting-alt | |
| 14:00:07 | gibi | mriedem: thanks | |
| 14:00:14 | gibi | mriedem: will post the final time on the ML | |
| 14:05:14 | openstackgerrit | caoyuan proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Update the description to make it more accuracy https://review.openstack.org/630681 | |
| 14:33:54 | efried | belmoreira: Howdy. Are you around today? | |
| 14:39:29 | asmita | gibi: Hi | |
| 14:41:17 | gibi | asmita: hu | |
| 14:41:20 | gibi | asmita: hi | |
| 14:42:25 | sean-k-mooney | adrianc: do you mind if i rebase the sriov patch series and start addressing some of stephenfin's nits | |
| 14:43:13 | asmita | gibi: How do we use this mehod?[1]:https://github.com/openstack/python-novaclient/blob/master/novaclient/tests/unit/utils.py#L30 | |
| 14:43:27 | asmita | method* | |
| 14:44:22 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: are you ok with removing your procedual -2 in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/616120/ since the spec has been merged and blueprint approved? | |
| 14:44:24 | mriedem | you don't | |
| 14:44:26 | mriedem | asmita: ^ | |
| 14:44:42 | mriedem | it's patching the mock library at import time to avoid adding tests which call invalid assert methods | |
| 14:44:54 | mriedem | which used to be a problem, but is fixed in latest mock i believe | |
| 14:45:20 | gibi | asmita: mriedem was faster. But I think the mock library already fixed to reject those wrong asserts | |
| 14:45:36 | gibi | asmita: so you don't even need that patch any more | |
| 14:45:49 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: done | |
| 14:46:49 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: thanks it need to be rebased and some nits addressed but i think the feature is effectivly complete. we just need to test it properly and clean it up at this point. | |
| 14:48:16 | asmita | Okay.There is a test scenario in test_hypervisors.py file of novaclient which I need to implement.I need to raise exception in that test case..But because of the fixtures,I get a error as "No mock address".So how do I overcome this situation? | |
| 14:49:26 | gibi | asmita: do you have a patch up on gerrit I can look at? | |
| 14:51:12 | asmita | gibi: Not yet. | |
| 14:51:27 | gibi | asmita: just push the not working code up so I can look at it | |
| 14:56:57 | asmita | gibi: Please have a look.https://github.com/openstack/python-novaclient/blob/master/novaclient/tests/unit/utils.py#L30 | |
| 14:57:06 | asmita | gibi: https://github.com/openstack/python-novaclient/blob/master/novaclient/tests/unit/utils.py#L30 | |
| 14:57:29 | asmita | gibi : Sorry wron link | |
| 14:57:34 | asmita | wrong link | |
| 14:58:35 | asmita | gibi: paste.openstack.org/show/742306..Thanks. | |
| 14:58:45 | gibi | asmita: looking... | |
| 14:59:49 | tobias-urdin | any good way to actually health check novncproxy? we've had some fallouts where it stops working with "handler exception: [Errno 32] Broken pipe" on console requests | |
| 15:00:17 | tobias-urdin | i guess i'll have to look into some doing some vnc client that does a handshake and tries to find some response that could be checked | |
| 15:04:32 | gibi | asmita: this patch you pasted works for me, both py27 and py35 test passes for me on it | |
| 15:05:21 | gibi | asmita: http://paste.openstack.org/show/742307/ | |
| 15:07:06 | asmita | gibi :Thanks . | |
| 15:07:24 | gibi | asmita: so I don't know why it doesn't work for you | |
| 15:09:10 | asmita | gibi : My concern here is whether it is okay to mock.patch and raise exception,the way I have done? | |
| 15:13:38 | asmita | gibi : Thanks.I will look into it. | |
| 15:17:35 | gibi | amotoki: is the self.cs.hypervisors.search() you call and the novaclient.v2.hypervisors.HypervisorManager.search that you mocked the same thing? if they are the same then you are not testing anything (except the mock library) | |
| 15:17:40 | gibi | amotoki: sorry | |
| 15:17:45 | gibi | asmita: ^^ | |
| 15:21:18 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Allow run metadata api per cell https://review.openstack.org/624612 | |
| 15:22:26 | mriedem | dansmith: the channel topic is pretty out of date, maybe we should just link to https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-runways-stein ? | |
| 15:22:36 | mriedem | "Current review runways: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-runways-stein" or something | |
| 15:22:40 | dansmith | aye | |
| 15:22:49 | dansmith | will update in a bit | |
| 15:22:59 | mriedem | thanks | |
| 15:27:04 | mriedem | easy runway bp change with a +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/624612/ - run meta-api per cell | |
| 15:27:10 | openstackgerrit | Jan Gutter proposed openstack/os-vif master: Extend port profiles with datapath offload type https://review.openstack.org/572081 | |
| 15:27:48 | belmoreira | efried: hi | |
| 15:28:25 | efried | belmoreira: Greetings. Today in the nova-scheduler meeting we brought up a couple of patches that CERN had showed interest in. | |
| 15:28:53 | efried | We were looking to find out if y'all could (re)deploy them to make sure they do what's intended and don't break the world. | |
| 15:29:00 | efried | (jaypipes heads up) | |
| 15:29:48 | efried | The first one was the placement traffic improvement series starting at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/615677/ | |
| 15:30:11 | efried | IIRC, you had deployed it and demonstrated the expected improvements, which is great. | |
| 15:30:11 | efried | but | |
| 15:30:22 | efried | there was some concern about how it would behave in large ironic deployments. | |
| 15:30:36 | efried | Late last week I made some updates to hopefully take care of that | |
| 15:31:25 | efried | Last I recall, you were about to start deploying to your ironic nodes - not sure how far you got on that or whether you stalled it because of the perceived problems with the patches. | |
| 15:31:43 | belmoreira | efried: that are great news | |
| 15:31:54 | efried | Anyway, we were hoping you could redeploy the series in its current form to see if it's copacetic | |
| 15:34:03 | belmoreira | before the end of the year I was trying it with the ironic compute nodes. It was in our small test cell, and it was OK. Scalability issues will only be noticed in our prod instance. Was planning to do it next week. | |
| 15:34:37 | belmoreira | will check the new code, thanks. | |
| 15:36:16 | efried | belmoreira: Great. | |
| 15:36:40 | efried | The other one was jaypipes: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/623558/ | |
| 15:36:40 | efried | I don't know anything about this, will let him speak to it. | |
| 15:43:09 | cfriesen | artom: have you made any progress with the resource-aware live migration stuff? I don't see any reviews up since the spec review. | |
| 15:43:56 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: i haven't seen artom online downstream yet today so not sure if he is about yet | |
| 15:44:26 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: thanks | |
| 15:44:54 | belmoreira | efried: I didn't try jaypipes code because merge/dependencies issues. Ended up with a custom code that only gets the info from the nodes in the cell. Will revisit it next week. | |
| 15:45:06 | efried | ight | |
| 15:45:18 | jaypipes | belmoreira: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/623558/ commit message should be self-explanatory. It should dramatically increase performance of your scheduler due to not doing N queries and only doing 1 query per cell. | |
| 15:45:29 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: i know he plans to work on it this sprint and once i finsih off the last few bits for the sriov migraton ill likely try and spend my time helping him with that work | |
| 15:46:28 | cfriesen | sean-k-mooney: good to hear. I'm hoping to have some review cycles for this. | |
| 15:52:05 | belmoreira | jaypipes: let me revisit again your patch. I wasn't able to use your code directly because it was relying in few things that are new to rocky and I got scared to push them to prod. But we cooked a light similar thing. This is the result in the schedule time: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1atA0wbUNBCdojiq8WyBKA0k8Ulyj91bzXDMPOIN9gRI | |
| 15:52:24 | belmoreira | jaypipes: I think yours will improve it even more | |
| 15:55:07 | belmoreira | jaypipes: after this what we observed is that now most of the time is because the placement call... But needs more investigation in our side. | |
| 15:56:53 | belmoreira | jaypipes: will let you know when we start again our tests. Thanks for all this work | |
| 15:57:55 | jaypipes | belmoreira: rock on :) | |
| 16:11:30 | adrianc | sean-k-mooney: working on the nits, PS will be uploaded by tommorow | |
| 16:12:38 | adrianc | sean-k-mooney: left to deal with several on the indirect implementation commit and ill upload | |
| 16:13:05 | sean-k-mooney | ok ill wait untill you have uploaded it so to rebase | |
| 16:13:25 | artom | sean-k-mooney, I'm around | |