Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2019-12-05
11:12:29 zbr_ even if is wasn't really pep8, it was flake8 + 10 others inside.
11:13:42 sean-k-mooney looking at that is mainly openstack ansible and windmil + some test projects
11:13:57 zbr_ on at least one project I made an "alias" to point pep8 -> linters, just to keep it working for the user. i hate to force people to change habits, especially good ones.
11:14:02 sean-k-mooney non of the core project or service project actully use linters which is why im not familar with it
11:14:15 zigo eandersson: What package do you need to be updated in Debian?
11:14:52 zbr_ sean-k-mooney: if you have pep8, keep using it and just document its more broad goal.
11:14:57 sean-k-mooney zbr_: sure im not really against tox -e linters
11:17:02 zbr_ sean-k-mooney: in fact I was considering altering the zuul jobs to introspect tox file and to run whatever they find linters or pep8. If I do this it would be much easier to projects to migrate to the more generic one. Now is almost impossible to remove openstack-tox-pep8 job as is deep inside defaults.
11:17:44 sean-k-mooney its just 200 project repos which is about 50% openstack stack ansible does not mean its a common practice in openstack when we have thoasands of repos in opendev orgs
11:17:47 zbr_ i already talked with infra about this about but i did not had time to go into action yet.
11:17:59 zbr_ true
11:18:17 sean-k-mooney zbr_: to do that you would need to modify the project testing interface
11:18:23 sean-k-mooney which require a tc vote
11:18:55 zbr_ that is why i was considering the smart linter idea, because it could allow people to adopt newer method without breaking existing users.
11:19:03 sean-k-mooney zbr_: no
11:19:14 sean-k-mooney that would be still a violation of the testing interface
11:19:33 sean-k-mooney if you want to change it then you shoudl propose a governace motion via a patch
11:20:05 zbr_ i know, but before working on such a change i wanted to get some feedback.
11:20:43 sean-k-mooney min would be we should keep pep8 and have an optional seperate linters target
11:20:49 sean-k-mooney *mine
11:21:07 zbr_ we already have this, probably is more than an year old
11:21:11 sean-k-mooney exitsting project that run addtionall linters in pep8 shoudl move them
11:21:16 sean-k-mooney to the linter target
11:53:13 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Unify '_wait_until_deleted' implementations https://review.opendev.org/689181
11:53:14 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Unify '_build_minimal_create_server_request' implementations https://review.opendev.org/695024
11:53:14 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Make '_IntegratedTestBase' subclass 'InstanceHelperMixin' https://review.opendev.org/689182
11:58:48 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Remove 'get_invalid_image' https://review.opendev.org/697454
12:00:04 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Unify '_wait_until_deleted' implementations https://review.opendev.org/689181
12:00:04 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Unify '_build_minimal_create_server_request' implementations https://review.opendev.org/695024
12:00:05 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Make '_IntegratedTestBase' subclass 'InstanceHelperMixin' https://review.opendev.org/689182
12:00:05 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: functional: Remove 'get_invalid_image' https://review.opendev.org/697454
12:26:59 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Integrate 'pre-commit' https://review.opendev.org/665518
14:02:55 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/train: Cache security group driver https://review.opendev.org/697475
14:09:05 shilpasd mriedem: requesting to review 'https://review.opendev.org/#/c/612626/
14:09:48 openstackgerrit sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: support pci numa affinity policies in flavor and image https://review.opendev.org/674072
14:10:03 shilpasd bauzas: requesting you to review 'https://review.opendev.org/#/c/650188/8 Allow compute nodes to use DISK_GB from shared storage RP' as per your priorities
14:10:13 bauzas shilpasd: ack
14:10:26 shilpasd bauzas: thank you
14:11:09 shilpasd @nova core: please review 'https://review.opendev.org/#/c/650188/8 Allow compute nodes to use DISK_GB from shared storage RP'
14:17:22 stephenfin Is anyone else seeing this message when running 'tox -e py36 ' http://paste.openstack.org/show/787167/ ?
14:19:46 mnaser eandersson: im just about ready to give up on rabbit clusters
14:24:29 mriedem shilpasd: comments on https://review.opendev.org/#/c/694462/
14:25:15 shilpasd mriedem: thank you for review, will work on them
14:25:36 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/stein: Cache security group driver https://review.opendev.org/697480
14:26:37 mriedem stephenfin: trying it
14:29:24 mriedem efried: this is why that multiple possible networks found thing is intermittent https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1831048
14:29:24 openstack Launchpad bug 1844568 in tempest "duplicate for #1831048 [compute] "create_test_server" if networks is undefined and more than one network is present" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Rodolfo Alonso (rodolfo-alonso-hernandez)
14:29:36 mriedem neutron tests create a new network at the same time we're creating a server and kaboom
14:30:01 mriedem though we shouldn't be running tempest.api.network tests in nova-next, but it could fail during scenario runs or something i guess?
14:30:08 mriedem stephenfin: i didn't get that problem
14:30:12 mriedem i'm on ubuntu bionic
14:30:20 stephenfin okay, it's a Fedora issue
14:30:22 stephenfin mriedem++ thanks
14:40:04 mriedem i wonder if the nova-next job hits that more often because of how we do concurrency differently in that job from others?
14:40:27 mriedem i think tempest-full runs api tests concurrently and scenario tests serially, and i think nova-next runs them all concurretly
14:43:01 mriedem yeah so i bet a network scenario test creates a network while the compute api tests are running and it blows up
14:44:04 sean-k-mooney mriedem: for the senario test do we not run those with concurancy 1
14:45:40 sean-k-mooney but yes i can see how it could fial in if a neutron test created a network in paralle with a compute test although ideally it would do that in a different tenant so that it could not affect other tests
14:46:03 mriedem there is probably a scenario test that creates a public network
14:46:16 mriedem and yes we run all tests, api and scenario, concurrently in nova-next
14:47:17 sean-k-mooney ah ok so we dont do the two pahse execution we do in tempst full wehre it runs all test excpet the senario tests first with concurrency and then runs the senario tests serially
14:47:35 sean-k-mooney ya that would proably make it more likely to fail in nova-next
14:49:57 mriedem all things i just said above
14:50:56 mriedem efried: gibi: so i think it was actually enabling tempest.scenario.test_minbw_allocation_placement.MinBwAllocationPlacementTest.test_qos_min_bw_allocation_basic in nova-next again that is making this worse
14:51:07 mriedem that test creates a public network
14:51:22 mriedem and everything that failed in this job was right around the time that test was running https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/b7872ac3886e4cc7a060c1376a2a3395/log/job-output.txt#79124
14:51:37 mriedem which is also our spike in failures http://logstash.openstack.org/#dashboard/file/logstash.json?query=message%3A%5C%22Details%3A%20%7B'code'%3A%20409%2C%20'message'%3A%20'Multiple%20possible%20networks%20found%2C%20use%20a%20Network%20ID%20to%20be%20more%20specific.'%7D%5C%22%20AND%20tags%3A%5C%22console%5C%22%20AND%20voting%3A1&from=7d
14:57:43 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Skip test_minbw_allocation_placement in nova-next job https://review.opendev.org/697491
14:57:49 mriedem gibi: efried: stephenfin: dansmith: if you wanna help the gate and love patriotism ^
14:58:20 stephenfin I hate patriotism, but I do have the feels for the gate
14:59:00 stephenfin yuuup, +2
15:01:02 stephenfin lyarwood: What was the reason for the request for configurables here? https://review.opendev.org/#/c/669674/3/nova/compute/manager.py@2613
15:01:49 stephenfin I want to -1 that patch _because_ of the seemingly extraneous knob but I could missing something
15:07:34 lyarwood stephenfin: looking
15:10:54 gibi mriedem: you are right. at the same time of the skip the test we need to keep an eye on the real fix https://review.opendev.org/#/c/682964
15:11:31 mriedem lyarwood: stephenfin: i left several comments in there too,
15:12:08 mriedem blindly retrying on *any* exception when doing something like deleting an attachment makes me nervous because if cinder returns a 404 because the original request completed and then we keep retrying, we're just going to keep retrying and getting 404s until we exhaust our retries
15:12:21 stephenfin good point
15:12:25 lyarwood stephenfin: no specific reason other than a personal dislike of hardcoded retry values tbh
15:12:27 mriedem iow, can we scope those retries to just 500 errors?
15:12:58 stephenfin and I have a personal dislike of knobs that no one ever touches
15:13:05 stephenfin Unstoppable force, meet immovable object :)
15:13:31 lyarwood Meets the guy with +2 over the guy with +1 so you win
15:13:53 lyarwood mriedem: yeah that's fair, I think a previous PS did previously and I've likely missed that cinder_exception.ClientException covers both?
15:14:48 lyarwood yeah it's the base, gah my bad.
15:15:26 mriedem right so https://github.com/openstack/python-cinderclient/blob/5.0.0/cinderclient/exceptions.py#L242 for 404 will create a NotFound(ClientException) and we'd retry on that
15:15:49 mriedem so we need to scope the retries to ClientExceptions with code==500 only imo
15:16:36 mriedem would also be nice to eventually add long_rpc_timeout to cinder for apis like this that have been known to take awhile
15:16:43 mriedem i know we've seen attachment delete timeout in the gate
15:16:57 mriedem surely red hat has some people working on cinder yeah?
15:17:37 lyarwood yup we do, I can follow up with them about that
15:17:46 mriedem https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1763712 is where i suggested using long_rpc_timeout in cinder
15:17:47 openstack Launchpad bug 1763712 in Cinder "Unable to update the attachment.: MessagingTimeout" [Medium,Confirmed]
15:17:59 mriedem it shouldn't be that hard to add since the cinder rpc stuff is likely very similar to nova's
15:32:22 mriedem gibi: on https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693248/ can't we just hard-code the server created to use the net0 network - that's the one that has the port with the qos allocations
15:34:48 mriedem oh well i guess shared != external
15:35:15 mriedem so we got the shared public external network and nova puked because by default non-admins can't create servers on external networks
15:39:38 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova stable/rocky: Cache security group driver https://review.opendev.org/697505
15:44:16 openstackgerrit Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Regression test for bug 1849657 https://review.opendev.org/693248
15:44:16 openstack bug 1849657 in OpenStack Compute (nova) train " allocation key is missing from the binding:profile of the neutron qos port when the server is created by a non-admin user" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1849657 - Assigned to Balazs Gibizer (balazs-gibizer)

Earlier   Later