| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2020-01-28 | |||
| 11:12:24 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/os-resource-classes master: setup.cfg: Configure 'python-requires' https://review.opendev.org/704533 | |
| 11:12:28 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/os-traits master: setup.cfg: Configure 'python-requires' https://review.opendev.org/704534 | |
| 11:12:29 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/os-traits master: setup.cfg: Remove unused 'build_sphinx' configuration https://review.opendev.org/704535 | |
| 11:17:00 | openstackgerrit | Vladyslav Drok proposed openstack/nova master: Make RBD imagebackend flatten method idempotent https://review.opendev.org/704330 | |
| 11:25:41 | openstackgerrit | Kobi Samoray proposed openstack/nova master: Avoid fetching metadata when no subnets found https://review.opendev.org/679247 | |
| 11:27:34 | openstackgerrit | Kobi Samoray proposed openstack/nova master: Avoid fetching metadata when no subnets found https://review.opendev.org/679247 | |
| 11:27:52 | openstackgerrit | Kobi Samoray proposed openstack/nova master: Support large network queries towards neutron https://review.opendev.org/704520 | |
| 12:01:10 | HagunKim | gibi: Thanks for your reply. But I found nothing with request_id. I will change log level to debug and see it again. | |
| 12:05:18 | gibi | not even in other nova services like nova api? | |
| 12:15:42 | bauzas | HagunKim: just use the os-instance-actions API | |
| 12:16:31 | bauzas | HagunKim: https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/#servers-actions-servers-os-instance-actions | |
| 12:19:07 | HagunKim | bauzas: Can I use that api for removed instances? | |
| 12:19:22 | bauzas | "Action information of deleted instances can be returned for requests starting with microversion 2.21." | |
| 12:19:26 | bauzas | :) | |
| 12:20:07 | bauzas | then you'll get the req-ids | |
| 12:20:24 | bauzas | so you can either ask again the same API for a specific req-id or just look at logs | |
| 12:20:47 | HagunKim | Oh I will check. Thank you! | |
| 12:33:40 | stephenfin | yo, sean-k-mooney, you probably want to weigh in on https://review.opendev.org/668656 since I _think_ you're of the same mindset as me RE: not forcing people to use placement constructs in nova land | |
| 12:34:15 | sean-k-mooney | i have in the irc discussions and yes | |
| 12:35:12 | sean-k-mooney | i would be oke with the placement syntax but only if we remove support for placement groups syntax form the flavor and stop doing a direct passthough to the api query effectivly | |
| 12:36:00 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. resouce:* would be ok if and only if we have a layer that parses that and then generate a different query based on the other extraspecs but i prefer the hw:* syntax | |
| 12:36:08 | openstackgerrit | Kobi Samoray proposed openstack/nova master: Avoid fetching metadata when no subnets found https://review.opendev.org/679247 | |
| 12:40:23 | stephenfin | my arguments slightly different to that. I'm okay with the placement syntax but I don't want it mixed with the legacy stuff. It's too confusing to reason about | |
| 12:43:46 | alex_xu | sean-k-mooney: stephenfin, if we are going to the vision about placement syntax in the future, will it be hard to deprecated those extra specs we added? | |
| 12:45:42 | alex_xu | I'm just thinking, it is vision, agreed by some people, but it is vision, we don't know when it happend, but people afarid we add more stuff which aren't existing in that vision. just thinking of if we have road to transfer to that vision, then we continue add extra specs, then it won't be a problem | |
| 12:47:18 | sean-k-mooney | alex_xu: i guess the only way i can see moving to placement syntax workin is if we remove the group syntax form the flavor | |
| 12:47:42 | sean-k-mooney | so i for won dont ever see use moving to placemnt syntax unless that happens | |
| 12:48:26 | sean-k-mooney | if the resouces:* requests are coupled to the placemetn toplogy directly that is an upgrade issue | |
| 12:49:01 | sean-k-mooney | that said with an indirection laywer between the placment query and the flavor it would be managable | |
| 12:49:11 | alex_xu | I see | |
| 12:49:46 | sean-k-mooney | but to your question i dont think doing hw:* is a blocker to doing resouces:* in the future | |
| 12:50:23 | alex_xu | but at that time, we need to deprecated some extra sepcs like 'hw:cpu_policy', any problem we deprecated one more more extra spec for 'hw:dedicated_cpu_set'(I forget the name)? | |
| 12:50:43 | sean-k-mooney | we can support that for cpu pinning today but i would continue to recommend using hw:cpu_policy=dedicated over resocues:PCPU=x | |
| 12:50:44 | alex_xu | yea, that is what i'm thinking | |
| 12:51:34 | alex_xu | huaqiang: efried dansmith stephenfin ^ | |
| 12:51:41 | sean-k-mooney | ya we would have to deprecate both toghter but 1 vs 2 extra specs is not really a big differece | |
| 12:51:45 | alex_xu | it is time pull everybody togetther again :) | |
| 12:52:15 | sean-k-mooney | we would still have to do an online data migration to update the embeded flavor or force the operator to resize every vm in either case | |
| 12:53:02 | sean-k-mooney | that is when we remove support for hw:cpu_policy if we ever do | |
| 12:53:12 | alex_xu | ah, resize, that is terrible | |
| 12:53:48 | sean-k-mooney | ya its the only way to update the embeded flavor today | |
| 12:54:23 | sean-k-mooney | which is why i dont like the idea of useing the placement syntax direcly as it is copled to the placement toplogy and if that chagne we need to either do a resize or an online data migration | |
| 12:55:13 | alex_xu | yea, i see | |
| 12:56:01 | sean-k-mooney | given we want to move pcpus under numa nodes in the next release or two i worry about relying on the placment syntax currently as that will be a toplogy change | |
| 12:58:59 | alex_xu | and we don't know it will happen in next release | |
| 13:00:11 | sean-k-mooney | ya we dont bauzas has reporposed it for this release https://review.opendev.org/#/c/552924/ but we have not really been reviewing it this cycle | |
| 13:01:13 | sean-k-mooney | so i think its unlikly to happen until next cycle at the earliest | |
| 13:04:11 | openstackgerrit | Kobi Samoray proposed openstack/nova master: Support large network queries towards neutron https://review.opendev.org/704520 | |
| 13:13:05 | openstackgerrit | Kobi Samoray proposed openstack/nova master: Support large network queries towards neutron https://review.opendev.org/704520 | |
| 13:13:19 | openstackgerrit | Kobi Samoray proposed openstack/nova master: Support large network queries towards neutron https://review.opendev.org/704520 | |
| 13:31:03 | openstackgerrit | Vladyslav Drok proposed openstack/nova master: Make RBD imagebackend flatten method idempotent https://review.opendev.org/704330 | |
| 13:32:37 | openstackgerrit | Ivaylo Mitev proposed openstack/nova master: Faults from cell DB missing in GET /servers/detail https://review.opendev.org/699176 | |
| 13:36:15 | openstackgerrit | Ivaylo Mitev proposed openstack/nova master: Faults from cell DB missing in GET /servers/detail https://review.opendev.org/699176 | |
| 13:40:33 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: alex_xu: comments are welcome on the spec | |
| 13:40:46 | bauzas | and I can provide a new revision given gibi's comments | |
| 13:41:02 | openstackgerrit | Ivaylo Mitev proposed openstack/nova master: Faults from cell DB missing in GET /servers/detail https://review.opendev.org/699176 | |
| 14:08:05 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: you spec mainly look at the queries sent to placement not how that is expressed in the flavor but i have conserns with how resouce request are represent in the flavor and i dont really think you should proceed untill hugepage/mempages are supported | |
| 14:08:33 | sean-k-mooney | im somewhat flexible on the last point but im not a fan of moving memory_mb to the numa node as it stands | |
| 14:17:22 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: yeah I need to think about the group_policy issue | |
| 14:23:41 | sean-k-mooney | its not just group_policy although that is a major issue i dont think the group syntax shoudl be used in the flavor at all | |
| 14:24:18 | sean-k-mooney | using it between nova and placment im more ok with | |
| 14:24:19 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: in the spec, I say that we should hide the placement queries | |
| 14:24:32 | bauzas | that's the consensus said so far at least | |
| 14:26:54 | sean-k-mooney | yes that is a saving grace of the current proposal in that it is advocatign for doing translation form the existing extra specs | |
| 14:27:16 | sean-k-mooney | that said its in conflict with the mix pinned and unpind cpus in one instnace work | |
| 14:55:30 | efried | stephenfin: whoops, we crossed in the mail, let me go back and respond to your comments before you respin please... | |
| 15:09:23 | efried | stephenfin: done | |
| 15:09:36 | efried | I don't think anything changed :) | |
| 16:14:19 | Sundar | Hello dansmith | |
| 16:15:14 | dansmith | Sundar: hi, I'm on a call right now | |
| 17:49:44 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: WIP: api: Add support for extra spec validation https://review.opendev.org/704643 | |
| 17:49:49 | stephenfin | efried: ^ | |
| 17:50:23 | efried | ack. You removing the prototype stuff from the spec? | |
| 17:50:32 | stephenfin | efried: Assuming you're not against the general idea I have in that spec, it might be worth skimming that patch to see if it addresses your concerns (note the TODOs to do microversion stuff) | |
| 17:50:53 | stephenfin | and if it looks good, I'll remove the prototype stuff and make it more handwavey :) | |
| 17:51:11 | stephenfin | well, I'll remove that anyway but the handwavey stuff will reflect what I'm going to actually do | |
| 17:51:19 | efried | cool | |
| 20:33:48 | openstackgerrit | Vladyslav Drok proposed openstack/nova master: Minor improvements to cell commands https://review.opendev.org/698053 | |
| 21:30:25 | openstackgerrit | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Use COMPUTE_SAME_HOST_COLD_MIGRATE trait during migrate https://review.opendev.org/695220 | |
| 22:34:45 | efried | stephenfin: The prototype code looks fine to me philosophically (I didn't leave any comments yet, though there are several things I noticed) but it really only answers one of the more minor issues (the non-splitting-out of namespace vs extra spec validators). | |
| 22:34:45 | efried | I think we're in agreement on most of the other pieces, but I'd like to close on the discussion of whether there will be something beyond microversion to enable/disable the validation; and if so, whether that thing can be made granular to the point of selecting whether to reject unknown keys. | |
| 22:34:45 | efried | IMO that's going to inform whether we set things up for strict validation out of the gate. | |
| #openstack-nova - 2020-01-29 | |||
| 03:52:44 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Handle cell failures in get_compute_nodes_by_host_or_node https://review.opendev.org/700186 | |
| 03:52:52 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: doc: define boot from volume in the glossary https://review.opendev.org/699009 | |
| 04:57:55 | openstackgerrit | Huachang Wang proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] More tests for validating CPU policy by 'resources:PCPU' and 'resources:VCPU' https://review.opendev.org/696007 | |
| 04:57:56 | openstackgerrit | Huachang Wang proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Refactor the code path of creating instance with a NUMA topology https://review.opendev.org/688932 | |
| 04:57:56 | openstackgerrit | Huachang Wang proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Assign instance dedicated CPU set through `cpu_pinning` field https://review.opendev.org/688933 | |
| 04:57:57 | openstackgerrit | Huachang Wang proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Introduce a new instance CPU allocation policy: mixed https://review.opendev.org/688934 | |
| 04:57:57 | openstackgerrit | Huachang Wang proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] support unbalanced dedicatd CPU distribution on instance NUMA nodes https://review.opendev.org/696008 | |
| 04:57:58 | openstackgerrit | Huachang Wang proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Create 'mixed' instance from PCPU and VCPU resources https://review.opendev.org/696009 | |
| 04:57:58 | openstackgerrit | Huachang Wang proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] metadata: export the vCPU IDs that are pinning on the host CPUs https://review.opendev.org/688936 | |
| 09:31:40 | bauzas | good morning Nova | |
| 09:38:43 | stephenfin | o/ | |
| 09:43:16 | gibi | \o | |
| 09:45:45 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Use COMPUTE_SAME_HOST_COLD_MIGRATE trait during migrate https://review.opendev.org/695220 | |
| 09:48:19 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Support unshelve with qos ports https://review.opendev.org/704759 | |
| 10:05:06 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Recalculate 'RequestSpec.numa_topology' on resize https://review.opendev.org/662522 | |
| 10:25:25 | stephenfin | gibi, bauzas: Either of you care to sanity check this and then send it on its way? Just updating to reflect post-merge reality | |
| 10:25:30 | stephenfin | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/666032/ | |
| 10:25:40 | bauzas | stephenfin: sure | |