Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-03-02
12:13:16 lyarwood it's direct if you're using that codepath
12:13:20 sean-k-mooney yes
12:13:32 sean-k-mooney but its not when not using the hyperv driver
12:13:42 sean-k-mooney and we said we were not going to do an os-brick bump for that
12:13:43 lyarwood we'd never bump os-brick with that logic
12:14:06 lyarwood there have been plenty of examples in the past where we have done this to accomidate the libvirt driver
12:14:18 lyarwood I don't get how that's optional
12:14:26 sean-k-mooney true however it makes all lib deps viral
12:14:31 openstackgerrit Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Add support for microversion v2.88 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/770573
12:15:17 sean-k-mooney if a lib bumps there min then any project that bumps there min to pick up that new lib version is forced to transitivly pick up any min verion change in that lib or its deps
12:15:49 lyarwood right and that's in LC at present
12:16:04 sean-k-mooney this did not use to happen with the old resolver
12:16:12 lyarwood because it was broken
12:16:19 sean-k-mooney no i know how it worked
12:16:23 sean-k-mooney it was not broken
12:16:31 sean-k-mooney it just worked differently then we expected
12:16:42 sean-k-mooney and that had some useful cases
12:16:48 sean-k-mooney it had some negitives too
12:17:08 sean-k-mooney but we have regressed our ablity to state teh min verion of nova requirements with the new resolver
12:17:41 sean-k-mooney now we can only state if you deploy every possible backend connently on the same host this is the set of all min deps
12:17:49 sean-k-mooney that is a very different statement
12:18:25 sean-k-mooney previously we only needed to do a bump it we use a python api that did not exist or had a different signiture
12:19:12 sean-k-mooney if nova did not use a feature in a trasitive dep directly we did not need to bump it in lc
12:19:24 sean-k-mooney for optional deps that was the correct behaivor
12:21:58 lyarwood I'm not disagreeing, but given the current behaviour of pip and the fact that we can't limit deps to each backend I don't see what choice we had here?
12:22:13 sean-k-mooney we could not do the bump
12:22:18 lyarwood land code that we know would fail with our current reqs?
12:22:26 sean-k-mooney there is no code path in any of our test coverage that will require this
12:22:43 lyarwood there is in third party for hyperv
12:22:48 sean-k-mooney lyarwood: it wont break our unit or funct test
12:22:56 lyarwood and?
12:23:00 sean-k-mooney lyarwood: right and they can install the dep
12:23:03 lyarwood we're still landing broken code
12:23:09 lyarwood it just feels wrong to me
12:23:25 lyarwood and in any case bumping os-brick like this pulls in a load of other fixes and improvements
12:23:28 sean-k-mooney so does importing deps form an optional lib
12:23:36 lyarwood I'd argue that we needed to do that this cycle anyway tbh
12:24:04 lyarwood there are no new deps there btw, just version bumps
12:24:06 sean-k-mooney we can do that for other reasons but i think this is a bad pattern to apply in the general case
12:24:13 sean-k-mooney oh i know
12:24:15 lyarwood the same would also apply
12:24:23 sean-k-mooney but we dont want every lib to be viral
12:24:41 sean-k-mooney you also have a smaller set of changes then the hyperv patch orginally had
12:25:07 lyarwood yeah I'm not sure where some of the changes in the original hyperv change came from but pip was happy with these
12:25:47 lyarwood aaaaaand something has already failed
12:25:53 sean-k-mooney if we want to proceed with this for this cycle i wont try to block it but i do think we need to have a ptg discusssion about this and i dont think we should do this in the future
12:26:23 sean-k-mooney the new resolver has changed the meanin of LC and expanded its scope
12:26:47 sean-k-mooney if we want to continue to use that i think we need to discuss what LC now means
12:27:32 lyarwood sean-k-mooney: yeah I've added a line in the ptg pad but feel free to rephrase the question
12:29:06 sean-k-mooney lyarwood: run tox with -r to recreate the env
12:29:16 sean-k-mooney or before that check the pip version
12:29:37 sean-k-mooney it wont automatically upgrade the pip version
12:29:52 sean-k-mooney so if the enve was created with the old resolver then it will still be using it
12:30:39 sean-k-mooney oh
12:30:43 lyarwood that's a different job
12:30:50 sean-k-mooney lyarwood: you forgot to update requirements.txt
12:30:52 lyarwood I'm just about to run it locally now
12:31:00 sean-k-mooney you only bumped the min in lc
12:31:09 lyarwood for the in-direct deps?
12:31:13 lyarwood I thought that wasn't required?
12:31:17 sean-k-mooney it is
12:31:30 sean-k-mooney we also use those directly
12:31:30 lyarwood huh pip was fine without them
12:31:44 sean-k-mooney pip is but this is the requiremetns check job
12:32:10 sean-k-mooney we dont allow the min in requirements.txt to differ form lc by policy in openstack
12:32:47 sean-k-mooney and that job enforces that while also check the markers match what is in GR/UC
12:33:28 lyarwood *sigh*
12:33:29 sean-k-mooney lyarwood: the script that does this is in the requiremetns repo if i rememebr correctly its not in nova so you cant test this with tox in nova
12:33:42 lyarwood yeah just building the venv now
12:34:10 sean-k-mooney it wont see this error since this is not part of nova
12:34:54 lyarwood the requirements venv
12:34:59 lyarwood not nova
12:35:02 sean-k-mooney ah
12:35:28 sean-k-mooney anyway its a simple fix
12:35:37 sean-k-mooney just update nova's requiremetns.txt
12:35:44 sean-k-mooney with the same min version you set in lc
12:36:46 sean-k-mooney you do not need to change anything in the requiremetns repo in case that is not obvious form the error
12:37:46 lyarwood it's obvious, I just wanted to run the same test locally
12:37:53 lyarwood from the requirements repo
12:43:05 ahsen Hi, I'm getting an error while creating an instance. It says "Build of instance xxx aborted: Volume xxx did not finish being created even after we waited 188 seconds or 61 attempts. And its status is downloading." I did not get this error before and there is'nt any error on Cinder's logs. Do you have any idea why am I getting this error? How can I
12:43:06 ahsen increase waiting time or attemps? We are using Ussuri. Thank you.
12:46:36 lyarwood ahsen: the retries and interval are controlled by CONF.block_device_allocate_retries and CONF.block_device_allocate_retries_interval on the Nova side
12:46:50 lyarwood ahsen: but you should trace the request through to the Cinder side to understand why it's taking so long
12:52:09 sean-k-mooney ahsen: is it a large image or are you using HDDs on the cinder side or low bandwith nics
12:53:04 sean-k-mooney ahsen: i had to set block_device_allocate_retries_interval=10 on my home cluster
12:53:55 sean-k-mooney the time it took for qemu image to copy the image data for larger images was taking just over 60 seconds and it was timing out
12:54:17 ahsen lyarwood Thank you, I will try to increase those values. And actually Cinder creates volumes but I don't know how long does it take
12:55:10 sean-k-mooney ahsen: if you look at teh cidner driver log you should see the qemu-img command doing the data transfer
12:55:38 sean-k-mooney ahsen: for me it only became a proable for images over about 5-8Gs
12:56:53 ahsen sean-k-mooney Image is not large and we are using SSD also bandwith is not low
12:57:44 lyarwood ahsen: kk, you should see a request-id logged by Nova from Cinder that you can use to grep through your logs
12:57:54 sean-k-mooney ok increasing the interval to 10 might help but you should look at the cidner logs and try and determin why its taking so long in that case
12:58:12 sean-k-mooney ahsen: what cinder backend are you using by the way
12:58:38 ahsen sean-k-mooney I will look at them
12:58:51 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: requirements.txt: Bump os-brick to 4.2.0 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778177
12:58:51 openstackgerrit Lee Yarwood proposed openstack/nova master: hyper-v rbd volume support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/763550
12:58:56 lyarwood okay lets try this again
13:00:28 ahsen lyarwood and sean-k-mooney I will try what you said. Thank you both
13:11:52 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: add AsyncDeviceEventsHandler https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/772381
13:26:44 lyarwood stephenfin: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/673790/14/nova/virt/libvirt/host.py@1244 - going to grab some lunch but let me know if that concern isn't clear still.

Earlier   Later