| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-04-09 | |||
| 15:31:29 | sean-k-mooney | kashyap: ok but my request for validating the feature is there in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534384/5/nova/conf/libvirt.py@538 anyway im almost through your spec which seams to provide it anyway. | |
| 15:31:48 | mriedem | efried: ok final question https://review.openstack.org/#/c/648800/7 | |
| 15:33:15 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: Nod; I recall seeing the comment | |
| 15:41:04 | efried | mriedem: responded | |
| 15:41:32 | efried | mriedem: Believe me, I would have preferred to put the glob in this change instead of individually in the four on top :( | |
| 15:42:02 | efried | I think gerrit will at least be smart enough not to generate a merge conflict on the three remaining when the first one merges... | |
| 15:46:58 | efried | dakshina-ilangov: A couple of things about https://review.openstack.org/#/c/651130/ just procedurally: | |
| 15:46:58 | efried | 1) Please wrap the body of the commit message at 72c | |
| 15:46:58 | efried | 2) You can build locally by running `tox -e docs` to resolve formatting issues | |
| 15:56:39 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Add 'flavor-extra-spec-image-property-validation-extended' spec https://review.openstack.org/638734 | |
| 16:08:32 | openstackgerrit | François Palin proposed openstack/nova master: nova diagnostics command is not working with all interfaces https://review.openstack.org/648123 | |
| 16:15:48 | stephenfin | kaboom | |
| 16:15:53 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove cells v1 jobs https://review.openstack.org/651289 | |
| 16:15:54 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'nova-cells' service https://review.openstack.org/651290 | |
| 16:15:54 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove '/os-cells' REST APIs https://review.openstack.org/651291 | |
| 16:15:55 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Stop handling cells v1 in '/os-hypervisors' API https://review.openstack.org/651292 | |
| 16:15:55 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Stop handling cells v1 in '/os-servers' API https://review.openstack.org/651293 | |
| 16:15:56 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'nova-manage cell' commands https://review.openstack.org/651294 | |
| 16:15:56 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Stop handling cells v1 for console authentication https://review.openstack.org/651295 | |
| 16:15:57 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove old-style cell v1 instance listing https://review.openstack.org/651296 | |
| 16:15:57 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'bdm_(update_or_create|destroy)_at_top' https://review.openstack.org/651297 | |
| 16:15:58 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'instance_fault_create_at_top' https://review.openstack.org/651298 | |
| 16:15:58 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'instance_info_cache_update_at_top' https://review.openstack.org/651299 | |
| 16:15:59 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'get_keypair_at_top' https://review.openstack.org/651300 | |
| 16:15:59 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'instance_update_at_top', 'instance_destroy_at_top' https://review.openstack.org/651301 | |
| 16:16:00 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove 'instance_update_from_api' https://review.openstack.org/651302 | |
| 16:16:00 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Stop handling 'update_cells' on 'BandwidthUsage.create' https://review.openstack.org/651303 | |
| 16:16:01 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Stop handling cells v1 for instance naming https://review.openstack.org/651304 | |
| 16:16:01 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Stop handling 'cell_name' field on Instance.save() https://review.openstack.org/651305 | |
| 16:16:02 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove cells code https://review.openstack.org/651306 | |
| 16:16:16 | sean-k-mooney | cells v1 removal | |
| 16:16:27 | stephenfin | I _think_ all but the last two or three should be passing unit test, functional tests and pep8 | |
| 16:16:34 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: yuuup | |
| 16:16:47 | sean-k-mooney | well the gate is going to be busy for a while | |
| 16:17:17 | stephenfin | First time in days that my laptop hasn't sounded like a rocket | |
| 16:17:32 | mriedem | stephenfin: are you going to throw that blueprint in the meeting agenda for thursday since it's a specless blueprint? | |
| 16:17:43 | stephenfin | mriedem: Good call. Sure | |
| 16:17:55 | gmann | mriedem: I would like to keep only first 3 fixes in this spec, hoping that will not be big for review/doc ? - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/603969/9 | |
| 16:18:11 | mriedem | because i may or may not have several new edge use cases and features for cells v1 and will block it's removal | |
| 16:18:48 | gmann | mriedem: success code change is something need more audit and can be done later ? | |
| 16:19:17 | mriedem | gmann: those first 3 are probably ok and straight-forward enough | |
| 16:19:41 | gmann | ok. let me update the spec. | |
| 16:25:25 | openstackgerrit | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Proposes NUMA affinity for vGPUs https://review.openstack.org/650963 | |
| 16:25:46 | bauzas | stephenfin: thanks for reviewing https://review.openstack.org/#/c/650963/, just wrote PS2 | |
| 16:33:46 | tssurya | mordred, mriedem, dansmith: after the back and forths on changing the type of the "locked" response key since all of you are for the seperate key style and no change on type I will just update the spec then to that approach. | |
| 16:34:02 | dansmith | tssurya: thanks | |
| 16:34:06 | tssurya | separate* | |
| 16:34:06 | mordred | ++ | |
| 16:34:18 | dansmith | I was shocked to have mordred come in and agree with me | |
| 16:34:40 | dansmith | he might not have realized what he was doing though | |
| 16:39:32 | dansmith | stephenfin: melwitt bauzas mriedem: I didn't see any discussion about how stephenfin only created five placeholders for the main db this time, but I do think that's probably more than enough and would be good for the future | |
| 16:39:59 | bauzas | yeah, I just feel 5 is enough given the history | |
| 16:39:59 | stephenfin | dansmith: I _think_ I called it out in the commit message or a comment, so I figured everyone was ok with that | |
| 16:40:14 | dansmith | stephenfin: I didn't see it anywhere | |
| 16:40:14 | stephenfin | (did it because you mentioned that we'd never used them anyway) | |
| 16:40:19 | mordred | dansmith: wait. I change my mind. whatever the opposite things is please | |
| 16:40:30 | dansmith | mordred: :) | |
| 16:41:06 | stephenfin | dansmith: Yeah, it wasn't as obvious as it should have been but it's there alright https://review.openstack.org/#/c/650964/1/nova/tests/unit/db/test_migrations.py@183 | |
| 16:41:24 | dansmith | ack, okay | |
| 16:44:11 | mriedem | he put it in a comment | |
| 16:44:17 | mriedem | oh yeah i'm late | |
| 16:44:52 | dansmith | I didn't read that deep since it was already merged, just saw the fewer file count | |
| 17:06:10 | gmann | dansmith: mriedem mordred can we remove 'locked' field in favor of 'locked_by' in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/638629/9/specs/train/approved/add-locked-reason.rst@198 | |
| 17:06:40 | dansmith | I'd rather we didn't | |
| 17:06:43 | mordred | gmann: it would be nicer to not remove the field | |
| 17:06:44 | gmann | it will be change for old user so no strong opinion just a thought. | |
| 17:06:50 | dansmith | it's just senseless change for no real gain | |
| 17:06:51 | gmann | yeah | |
| 17:07:09 | mriedem | pretty sure that was discussed in some of the earlier patch sets | |
| 17:07:19 | gmann | ok. | |
| 17:09:39 | bauzas | stephenfin: I'm a terrible man, I left you a -1 on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/555081 after you left | |
| 17:10:07 | bauzas | but I feel it's worth discussing on the upgrade path | |
| 17:10:09 | openstackgerrit | Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Spec for API inconsistency cleanup https://review.openstack.org/603969 | |
| 17:10:31 | bauzas | I'm in favor of just saying "heh dude, migrate your workloads first before touching anything or your compute will blow up" | |
| 17:10:52 | gmann | mriedem: mordred updated the API cleanup spec with only 3 cleanups to target. https://review.openstack.org/603969 | |
| 17:11:17 | dansmith | bauzas: um, really? | |
| 17:11:38 | dansmith | bauzas: you want cern to have to migrate all their workloads before/during an upgrade? | |
| 17:11:49 | bauzas | dansmith: no, that's not what I meant | |
| 17:12:05 | bauzas | dansmith: I meant, before changing the opts | |
| 17:12:26 | bauzas | if you upgrade and just keep the same conf, you're not impacted | |
| 17:12:41 | bauzas | actually, I left another comment saying this | |
| 17:13:04 | bauzas | ie. keep existing behaviour in Train exactly like in Stein if untouched | |
| 17:13:12 | dansmith | okay let me re-read | |
| 17:13:36 | bauzas | dansmith: context being https://review.openstack.org/#/c/555081/22 | |
| 17:13:54 | dansmith | right I know :) | |
| 17:14:13 | bauzas | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/555081/22/specs/train/approved/cpu-resources.rst@171 is the existing backwards compat concern I have => don't change anything | |
| 17:14:38 | mriedem | tssurya: gmann: i left some comments on the locked reason spec regarding filtering and sorting, but i'm not sure why locked is not a valid sort/filter parameter but locked_by is - even though we dont currently expose the latter | |
| 17:14:47 | mordred | gmann: all of those fields with OS-EXT prefixes are readonly aren't they? | |
| 17:14:49 | bauzas | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/555081/22/specs/train/approved/cpu-resources.rst@181 is the "what happens when you start playing with those new opts" | |
| 17:15:09 | tssurya | mriedem: I was just about to push :) | |
| 17:15:26 | dansmith | bauzas: okay, so what happens if you do make those changes on a compute node with instances? | |
| 17:15:28 | bauzas | oh man, I really thought the locked reason spec was not controversial :) | |
| 17:15:28 | tssurya | oh had just added filtering based on the new keys will be allowed | |
| 17:15:30 | mordred | gmann: in any case - we expose all of those without the prefix in sdk already - so I'm definitely in favor of that cleanup :) | |
| 17:16:02 | mriedem | tssurya: you can't filter on something that's stored in system_metadata | |
| 17:16:05 | dansmith | bauzas: as long as the same config means you don't have to move stuff that's okay, I thought you were kindof implying that they would have to move everything at some point though | |
| 17:16:06 | bauzas | dansmith: that's my point, in the spec, we say we reshape | |
| 17:16:18 | bauzas | when we start using those opts | |
| 17:16:22 | tssurya | bauzas: I thought so too! (when I initially proposed it) | |
| 17:16:30 | mordred | (although I think I need to add a way to express inside of sdk "this property comes from whichever of OS-EXT-AZ:availability_zone or availability_zone exists" | |