| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2019-04-09 | |||
| 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" | |
| 17:16:48 | bauzas | dansmith: nope, nope, keep same things in Train if config unchanged | |
| 17:16:56 | dansmith | bauzas: I would expect someone like CERN to really care about enabling this sort of thing and requiring everyone to move many gigs of data around just so we don't have to reshape is kinda icky | |
| 17:17:01 | dansmith | I mean, really icky | |
| 17:17:11 | bauzas | dansmith: I totally agree | |
| 17:17:21 | tssurya | mriedem: oh yea forgot ! I guess we discussed this too earlier in the spec when we were deciding where to put it | |
| 17:17:26 | mriedem | mordred: not necessarily, OS-DCF:diskConfig is on server create | |
| 17:17:40 | gmann | mriedem: they are all in response so did not get readonly thing completely | |
| 17:17:46 | bauzas | dansmith: that's why I'm in favor of a full service stop if operators start playing with new config opts in Train and have existing instances | |
| 17:17:58 | mordred | mriedem: ah - so it is. ok - that one will take a little extra effort - but shouldn't be too bad | |