Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-02-08
01:49:26 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] New objects to transmit NUMA config from dest to source https://review.openstack.org/634827
01:49:26 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] LM: generate new NUMA XML on the dest and send it to the source https://review.openstack.org/634828
01:49:27 openstackgerrit Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] LM: update NUMA-related XML on the source https://review.openstack.org/635229
03:37:38 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/python-novaclient master: Remove deprecated novaclient.v2.contrib modules https://review.openstack.org/635430
04:00:06 openstackgerrit Jack Ding proposed openstack/nova master: Correct instance port binding for rebuilds https://review.openstack.org/603844
05:09:50 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova stable/ocata: Default embedded instance.flavor.is_public attribute https://review.openstack.org/619366
05:41:25 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Fix deprecation warning for threadgroup.add_timer https://review.openstack.org/635516
09:39:55 bauzas good Friday nova
09:40:27 bauwser (heh, that's maybe 3 months I didn't used my Friday suit :) )
11:21:45 openstackgerrit Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/nova master: Check hosts have no instances for AZ rename https://review.openstack.org/509206
11:27:20 stephenfin bauwser: Whoops
11:58:53 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: API: Remove evacuate/live-migrate 'force' parameter https://review.openstack.org/634600
12:22:43 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Transfer port.resource_request to the scheduler https://review.openstack.org/567268
12:25:29 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova-specs master: AMD SEV: address final feedback received prior to merge https://review.openstack.org/628252
12:42:37 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: Avoid redundant initialize_connection on source post live migration https://review.openstack.org/551302
12:46:56 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing required in servers ViewBuilder to construct partial results https://review.openstack.org/635146
12:46:57 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: API microversion 2.68: Handles Down Cells https://review.openstack.org/591657
12:46:57 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: API microversion 2.68: Handles Down Cells Documentation https://review.openstack.org/635147
12:56:30 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/os-traits master: Add HW_CPU_AMD_SEV trait https://review.openstack.org/635608
14:00:43 mriedem tssurya: i think we're just missing a unit test on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/635121/ and then i'd be +2
14:04:14 tssurya mriedem: on it thanks
14:08:12 mriedem dansmith: another good example of how brittle everything is https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1815153
14:08:14 openstack Launchpad bug 1815153 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Requested host during cold migrate is ignored if server created before Rocky" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Takashi NATSUME (natsume-takashi)
14:09:30 mriedem tssurya: if you're respinning i had some nits in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/635145/ as well
14:09:57 tssurya mriedem: yea saw them, I'll fix them too
14:16:56 bauwser mriedem: thanks for the detailed bug report on https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1815153
14:16:57 openstack Launchpad bug 1815153 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Requested host during cold migrate is ignored if server created before Rocky" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Takashi NATSUME (natsume-takashi)
14:17:18 bauwser mriedem: tbc, requested_destination wasn't intended to be persisted
14:26:04 dansmith mriedem: just in general?
14:26:21 mriedem just another example of how i feel that everything i touch breaks something else somewhere
14:26:33 dansmith ah yep
14:26:38 mriedem bauwser: sure, we fixed that,
14:26:46 mriedem and in doing so broke something else inadvertently later
14:32:20 bauwser mriedem: ergh ok
14:37:54 mriedem i'm also not sure why,
14:37:56 mriedem because of https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/compute/api.py#L3329
14:38:18 mriedem we should blow up here https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/conductor/manager.py#L1009 with an old request spec
14:38:26 mriedem but i modified a functional test that hits that code and it doesn't blow pu
14:38:27 mriedem *up
14:38:56 mriedem oh i see why
14:39:02 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/compute/api.py#L3329 has no effect on save
14:40:13 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/objects/request_spec.py#L619.
14:46:05 bauwser mriedem: yeah, most of the problems with the persisted fields in the ReqSpec is because we late call .save() sometimes or not
14:46:43 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing for ignoring list_records_by_skipping_down_cells https://review.openstack.org/635121
14:46:44 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing for allowing the all-tenants filter with down cells https://review.openstack.org/635145
14:46:44 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: Plumbing required in servers ViewBuilder to construct partial results https://review.openstack.org/635146
14:46:45 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: API microversion 2.68: Handles Down Cells https://review.openstack.org/591657
14:46:45 openstackgerrit Surya Seetharaman proposed openstack/nova master: API microversion 2.68: Handles Down Cells Documentation https://review.openstack.org/635147
14:47:02 bauwser mriedem: so the only way to make sure to not persist them is to verify if save() does it or not
14:47:04 openstackgerrit Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/nova master: zuul: add cross-repo jobs for openstack-ansible https://review.openstack.org/635852
14:47:48 mriedem i would argue the root of our problems with the request spec is its dual nature - it's both a record of the original server create request (and modified on rebuild + new image and resize + new flavor), but also used as a parameter data bag to pass stuff to the scheduler for per-request operatoins like migrations
14:47:54 mriedem and we don't deal with ^ very well
14:48:13 bauwser yeah I agree with you
14:48:24 mriedem if we would have just passed things like requested_destination through to the scheduler as a specific parameter we could have saved some trouble
14:48:37 bauwser well
14:48:39 bauwser sure
14:48:50 cdent change it?
14:48:54 bauwser but we had a consensus about not doing this 2 years ago ;)
14:49:06 bauwser we preferred to pass o.vo objects rathre :)
14:49:07 mriedem sure, because 2 years ago no one anticipated the shit loads of bugs
14:49:25 mriedem i'm not advocating a big overhaul since that will yield yet more bugs
14:49:48 mriedem i just bemoan blowing off a two every time i try to stitch a finger back on
14:49:53 mriedem *toe
14:49:57 bauwser well, maybe the analysis could be to say which fields should be persisted once and which ones not
14:50:06 mriedem bauwser: we already have that in the request spec
14:50:12 mriedem and have been adding to it over time
14:50:20 bauwser right
14:50:27 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/objects/request_spec.py#L587
14:50:30 mriedem https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/objects/request_spec.py#L593
14:50:50 mriedem gibi is already handling requested_resources so they aren't overwritten on save https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/objects/request_spec.py#L517
14:51:00 mriedem we need to do the same for those other fields probably
14:51:00 bauwser ok
14:51:06 bauwser yeah I guess
14:51:14 bauwser like the flavor
14:51:26 bauwser when should we persist it?
14:51:39 bauwser for example, for resize
14:51:43 mriedem flavor isn't in that list
14:51:56 bauwser should we persist the new flavor in the original ReqSpec ?
14:51:59 bauwser I know
14:52:05 mriedem we already do that here yeah https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/conductor/manager.py#L361
14:52:06 bauwser I guess so
14:52:09 bauwser so
14:52:43 bauwser what I'm trying to explain is that we basically fixed problems by each bug
14:52:52 bauwser and then we modified the object
14:53:07 bauwser maybe we should just take some time to discuss about *all* the fields
14:53:09 mriedem oh yeah and that flavor thing introduced a bug that was latent for a long time https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/a6963fa6858289d048e4d27ce8e61637cd023f4c/nova/compute/api.py#L3403
14:53:23 bauwser right
14:53:32 bauwser I'm just giving examples
14:53:38 mriedem and i'm just venting
14:53:41 bauwser so, honestly, the more I'm thinking
14:53:58 bauwser the more I wonder if we should have more than one RequestSpec for an instance :)
14:54:10 bauwser ie. the original record for create
14:54:16 bauwser and then a new record for a move
14:54:31 mriedem the more i think about request spec, the less i want to think about request spec
14:54:36 mriedem i want to get this bug fixed and move on
14:54:38 bauwser hah
14:55:05 bauwser anyway, I need to go to a meeting
14:55:10 bauwser :/
15:21:25 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Trim fake_deserialize_context in test_conductor https://review.openstack.org/635859
15:21:27 mriedem another subunit parser thing ^ based on http://logs.openstack.org/27/619527/16/gate/openstack-tox-lower-constraints/cd2889d/job-output.txt.gz#_2019-02-08_12_32_26_104934

Earlier   Later