Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-01-26
17:19:48 sean-k-mooney ya looking at load
17:20:15 sean-k-mooney 15 min avgerage is like 0.76
17:20:30 sean-k-mooney it was using 1-2 cores max while running before
17:20:45 sean-k-mooney it spiked a littel when doing the db migrations
17:21:04 sean-k-mooney so that is where the extra cores definetly help
17:21:15 dansmith yeah, on one of my machines it went from about 0.5 to 2.0
17:21:41 dansmith not for the whole thing but for good portions of it
17:21:56 sean-k-mooney ok its stacking again ill let you know in 15 mins or so
17:22:50 sean-k-mooney 13-15 mins is what i normally expect for this vm so if its better or the same then the patch is proably an improvment
17:22:59 dansmith cool
17:31:18 sean-k-mooney and done
17:31:25 sean-k-mooney it hit 3.78 there for a bit
17:32:09 sean-k-mooney http://paste.openstack.org/show/802007/
17:32:48 sean-k-mooney so that is much better
17:33:14 dansmith 30%
17:33:17 dansmith you're welcome :)
17:33:43 sean-k-mooney what me to test this on clean vms to see what impact it has then
17:33:51 sean-k-mooney this is how i normallyuse devstack however
17:34:05 sean-k-mooney so 30% on my normal uscase it very good
17:34:14 dansmith well, the gate preloads the project git dirs, so it's closer to what you just tested
17:34:27 sean-k-mooney ya it is
17:34:30 dansmith there is more fat to be cut, by the way
17:34:37 dansmith I've optimized some of stack.sh and nova,
17:34:43 sean-k-mooney and they cache the pip and apt stuff close to the vms too
17:34:46 dansmith but there are things neutron does that we can parallellize I think
17:34:54 dansmith oh I did a bunch of keystone things too
17:35:03 sean-k-mooney did you look at the plugins
17:35:11 dansmith being able to stack in 6 minutes is a major life improvement to me
17:35:31 sean-k-mooney i would have to run in offlinemode to do that
17:35:45 dansmith only tempest, which I do some of in parallel, but we regen the venv several times for reasons I don't understand, but we could probably improve there too
17:36:03 sean-k-mooney ya i have seen that
17:36:20 sean-k-mooney its not clear to me why either
17:36:33 sean-k-mooney the local pip cache helps but its not perfect
17:37:45 sean-k-mooney dansmith: what was your normal stack time before out of interest
17:38:27 dansmith sean-k-mooney: on my usual stripped-down config, it's 513s serialized, 402s parallell
17:39:18 sean-k-mooney ya not bad still a nice improvment
17:39:59 sean-k-mooney that said even a 15min run is better then ooo
17:40:57 dansmith mm yeah :)
17:42:58 sean-k-mooney dansmith: apparently our downstreeam upgrade jobs take 11hours currently.
17:43:15 dansmith yeah that's pretty sadface
17:43:20 sean-k-mooney i just can even comprehend debuging those if they fail
17:43:39 dansmith yeah :/
17:43:45 dansmith sean-k-mooney: if you could comment on that async patch with your results and environment, I'd appreciate it
17:44:44 sean-k-mooney yep i need to prep a fedra 32 vm for other things anyway today so ill do a fresh install run on that and comment when its done with the details
17:44:58 dansmith okay thanks
17:45:10 dansmith gmann: results from sean-k-mooney btw :) ^
17:45:34 dansmith tl;dr his VMs are closer to upstream gate and he got 30% improvement
17:46:44 sean-k-mooney i can test this in my ci later in the week proably too need to do some maintance on it before i do but i have some other things to rebase and backport first so wont get to it for a while
17:47:21 dansmith sean-k-mooney: was that a fairly fat devstack config? like all the normal services?
17:48:54 sean-k-mooney yes an no ill past bin it
17:49:08 sean-k-mooney http://paste.openstack.org/show/802010/
17:49:19 sean-k-mooney no swift or heat but i hav ecinder and horizon
17:49:58 gmann dansmith: sean-k-mooney nice. are you running it on fresh machine with/wihtout devstack-parallel or with/without unstack/stack ?
17:50:16 sean-k-mooney so nova,neutron,placement,cinder,glance,horizon,tempest with ml2/ovs
17:50:39 dansmith gmann: when I test, I run it with/without parallel on a "warmed up" machine, i.e. where /opt/stack already has the projects cloned, like gate
17:50:55 dansmith we could definitely parallelize the cloning of all the projects too
17:51:01 sean-k-mooney gmann: basically the same for my test
17:51:07 sean-k-mooney gmann: i stacked then unstack
17:51:09 dansmith sean-k-mooney: ack, okay mine is no cinder or horizin
17:51:18 dansmith right, stack/unstack/stack
17:51:28 sean-k-mooney then stacked again to get the baseline time unstackted. and stacked in parallel mode
17:51:49 sean-k-mooney so all the pacakge and repos should be cached or clonned
17:51:52 gmann yeah clone is not something to count in this
17:54:31 sean-k-mooney i did not have OFFLINE=True which i can do that would disable all package installs and clones but it should not really be a factor in my current testing
17:54:42 sean-k-mooney ill let ye both know how the fresh install goes
17:55:15 dansmith once the system is warmed up I don't think that would do much anyway, right?
17:56:11 sean-k-mooney it will prevent it even trying to do apt/dnf install i dont think it really affect pip however
17:56:18 sean-k-mooney so when its primmed no not really
17:56:33 dansmith ack, but apt should mostly just say "yeah already got that"
17:56:39 dansmith minor improvement maybe but nothing major
17:56:43 dansmith in the noise I expect
17:56:47 sean-k-mooney yep it just has to check the index is up to date
17:57:41 sean-k-mooney also i have gigabit networking at home so its going to be pretty fast considing i sit less then 2 miles form where the irish henet mirrors are hosted
17:58:04 sean-k-mooney there hosted in the university i live beside
17:59:42 sean-k-mooney 64 bytes from ftp-node-prod-bl-01.heanet.ie (193.1.193.10): icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=7.50 ms
18:01:13 sean-k-mooney vs 64 bytes from 172.20.4.244: icmp_seq=15 ttl=62 time=3.41 ms to my vm :)
18:58:12 sean-k-mooney looks like my clean fedora run is going to fail because the cirros download is hanging
18:58:29 sean-k-mooney so ill just post my old results and node details to the devstack review
19:12:21 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: Move query param generation to RequestGroup o.vo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/756894
19:33:01 gmann stephenfin: lbragstad should not placement_policy.reset() take care of cleaning all default or registered rules? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/772508/1/placement/tests/unit/policy_fixture.py#36
19:33:39 gmann I am not completely understanding how it is causing the issue with placement_policy.reset() in test. though i agree on fixing it on oslo policy side
19:34:05 gmann or something i am missing here
19:58:59 dansmith sean-k-mooney: thanks
20:15:19 gmann lbragstad: before I proceed on other patches in that series, one comment about SYSTEM_ADMIN https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760240/21/placement/policies/base.py#20
20:15:56 gmann I think we do not need SYSTEM_ADMIN in placement as such
20:16:40 gmann and this way is better and avoid rule deprecation - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760235/10/placement/policies/aggregate.py#52
20:45:07 lbragstad gmann i think that's true with the exception of the usage api since it supports project and system scope?
20:46:37 lbragstad actually - not if enforce_scope=True
20:47:21 gmann lbragstad: yeah usage API use only reader right
20:48:06 gmann if enforce_scope=True then scope_type will care as existing scope is system for admin API
20:51:37 gmann only use case i see is if enforce_scope=False , enforce_new_defaults=True but technically there is no new default for admin APIs its admin only right
21:12:39 openstackgerrit melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: compute: Lock by instance.uuid lock during swap_volume https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758732
23:16:07 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: db: Compact Juno database migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/758395
23:56:40 sean-k-mooney lbragstad: gmann im going to stop reviewing the palcemnt series until ye have a chance ot responed regarding defineing SYTEM_ADMIN as a dict and preferably in oslo policy eventually
23:58:00 sean-k-mooney i really think that SYSTEM_ADMIN should be a common shared defintion across all poject and not something that can vary between cloud or services.
23:59:19 gmann sean-k-mooney: lbragstad stephenfin replied on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/760240/21/placement/policies/base.py#20
23:59:41 gmann sean-k-mooney: we can move to common place but there are few challenge in doing that
#openstack-nova - 2021-01-27
00:00:44 gmann https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.policy/+/766536
00:02:03 gmann if we want to support 4th scenario I mentioned in that review then yes we can have otherwise there is no change with SYSTEM_ADMIN and what we have currently
00:03:14 sean-k-mooney well i was suggesting that at a minium we define SYSTEM_ADMIN as

Earlier   Later