| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-04-14 | |||
| 19:44:11 | noonedeadpunk | this happens only with the template by the way | |
| 19:44:11 | noonedeadpunk | this happens only with the template by the way | |
| 19:47:54 | noonedeadpunk | this condition feels wrong for the template https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/cmd/manage.py#L623-L624 | |
| 19:47:54 | noonedeadpunk | this condition feels wrong for the template https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/cmd/manage.py#L623-L624 | |
| 19:50:13 | noonedeadpunk | because `cell.database_connection` and `cell.transport_url` are always resolved while checked, and `database_connection` with `transport_url` are shown as template... | |
| 19:50:13 | noonedeadpunk | because `cell.database_connection` and `cell.transport_url` are always resolved while checked, and `database_connection` with `transport_url` are shown as template... | |
| 19:56:56 | noonedeadpunk | wrote down https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1923899 - will try to check what can be done there tomorrow, unless there already be a suggestions | |
| 19:56:56 | noonedeadpunk | wrote down https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1923899 - will try to check what can be done there tomorrow, unless there already be a suggestions | |
| 19:56:57 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1923899 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Nova create duplicate cells when templates are used" [Undecided,New] | |
| 20:05:08 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Explaining when a base image is considered unused to avoid confusion why some images aren't deleted. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/786059 | |
| 20:05:08 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova master: Explaining when a base image is considered unused to avoid confusion why some images aren't deleted. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/786059 | |
| 20:13:48 | noonedeadpunk | It feels like template conversion is processed somewhere in models, as eventually here it's already converted from template to url https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/objects/cell_mapping.py#L258 | |
| 20:13:48 | noonedeadpunk | It feels like template conversion is processed somewhere in models, as eventually here it's already converted from template to url https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/objects/cell_mapping.py#L258 | |
| 20:13:58 | noonedeadpunk | unless it's done somewhere in oslo.... | |
| 20:13:58 | noonedeadpunk | unless it's done somewhere in oslo.... | |
| 20:14:46 | noonedeadpunk | as kind of see nothing in models... https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/db/sqlalchemy/api_models.py#L111 | |
| 20:14:46 | noonedeadpunk | as kind of see nothing in models... https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/db/sqlalchemy/api_models.py#L111 | |
| 20:18:45 | noonedeadpunk | ok, that's where conversion is done https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/objects/cell_mapping.py#L159-L169 | |
| 20:18:45 | noonedeadpunk | ok, that's where conversion is done https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/objects/cell_mapping.py#L159-L169 | |
| 20:19:37 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: the cell names are uniqe yes | |
| 20:19:37 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: the cell names are uniqe yes | |
| 20:20:10 | sean-k-mooney | but i dont think we enforce that with a db constraint | |
| 20:20:10 | sean-k-mooney | but i dont think we enforce that with a db constraint | |
| 20:20:36 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure what will happen with http://paste.openstack.org/show/804488/ | |
| 20:20:36 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure what will happen with http://paste.openstack.org/show/804488/ | |
| 20:20:39 | noonedeadpunk | yeah, there's totally a bug in tempaltes usage | |
| 20:20:39 | noonedeadpunk | yeah, there's totally a bug in tempaltes usage | |
| 20:20:43 | sean-k-mooney | other then it will proably break | |
| 20:20:43 | sean-k-mooney | other then it will proably break | |
| 20:22:01 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: it look like maybe you don thave support for multiple cells? | |
| 20:22:01 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: it look like maybe you don thave support for multiple cells? | |
| 20:22:10 | sean-k-mooney | looking at https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/+/786258/1/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml | |
| 20:22:10 | sean-k-mooney | looking at https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/+/786258/1/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml | |
| 20:22:11 | noonedeadpunk | not sure just what's the best way to pass to avoid formatting here https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/objects/cell_mapping.py#L159-L169 considering it's going through oslo.versionedobjects | |
| 20:22:11 | noonedeadpunk | not sure just what's the best way to pass to avoid formatting here https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/objects/cell_mapping.py#L159-L169 considering it's going through oslo.versionedobjects | |
| 20:22:20 | sean-k-mooney | it was previously hardcoded as --name {{ nova_cell1_name }} | |
| 20:22:20 | sean-k-mooney | it was previously hardcoded as --name {{ nova_cell1_name }} | |
| 20:23:07 | noonedeadpunk | well, my point is more about that if I run excatly same create_cell command twice - I get exact same 2 cells with different uuids | |
| 20:23:07 | noonedeadpunk | well, my point is more about that if I run excatly same create_cell command twice - I get exact same 2 cells with different uuids | |
| 20:23:38 | sean-k-mooney | ya which is porably a nova bug | |
| 20:23:38 | sean-k-mooney | ya which is porably a nova bug | |
| 20:23:54 | noonedeadpunk | because verification if that cell already exists is just broken for tempalate user scenario - as it compares what is passed as an argument with already resolved template | |
| 20:23:54 | noonedeadpunk | because verification if that cell already exists is just broken for tempalate user scenario - as it compares what is passed as an argument with already resolved template | |
| 20:23:57 | sean-k-mooney | i cant think of a valid reason to allow that | |
| 20:23:57 | sean-k-mooney | i cant think of a valid reason to allow that | |
| 20:24:23 | sean-k-mooney | right we should have a unique constraint on the cell name | |
| 20:24:23 | sean-k-mooney | right we should have a unique constraint on the cell name | |
| 20:24:35 | noonedeadpunk | and you can't do that anyway when you use just old good fixed stuff | |
| 20:24:35 | noonedeadpunk | and you can't do that anyway when you use just old good fixed stuff | |
| 20:25:12 | noonedeadpunk | or avoid resolution of the template when we checking if same cell already exist | |
| 20:25:12 | noonedeadpunk | or avoid resolution of the template when we checking if same cell already exist | |
| 20:26:03 | sean-k-mooney | https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/db/sqlalchemy/api_models.py#L111-L129 | |
| 20:26:03 | sean-k-mooney | https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/branch/master/nova/db/sqlalchemy/api_models.py#L111-L129 | |
| 20:26:15 | noonedeadpunk | So I'd say when we call here https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/commit/9e5feb051c15166988e87b10132927135bd56884/nova/cmd/manage.py#L618 we should pass smth like resolve=false | |
| 20:26:15 | noonedeadpunk | So I'd say when we call here https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/commit/9e5feb051c15166988e87b10132927135bd56884/nova/cmd/manage.py#L618 we should pass smth like resolve=false | |
| 20:26:17 | sean-k-mooney | so the unique constatin is only the uuid currently | |
| 20:26:17 | sean-k-mooney | so the unique constatin is only the uuid currently | |
| 20:26:27 | sean-k-mooney | we shoudl also have one on the name | |
| 20:26:27 | sean-k-mooney | we shoudl also have one on the name | |
| 20:26:41 | noonedeadpunk | yeah, I saw that... | |
| 20:26:41 | noonedeadpunk | yeah, I saw that... | |
| 20:26:46 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: do you know why that is the case today ^ | |
| 20:26:46 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: do you know why that is the case today ^ | |
| 20:27:08 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i.e. why we allow to cell records with the same name? | |
| 20:27:08 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i.e. why we allow to cell records with the same name? | |
| 20:27:27 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: as far as i know we only use the id in other tables | |
| 20:27:27 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: as far as i know we only use the id in other tables | |
| 20:27:41 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: so other then cell0 which is speciall we dont really use the cell name | |
| 20:27:41 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: so other then cell0 which is speciall we dont really use the cell name | |
| 20:28:07 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: its just for operators really | |
| 20:28:07 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: its just for operators really | |
| 20:28:21 | dansmith | yeah, name is just for the humans | |
| 20:28:21 | dansmith | yeah, name is just for the humans | |
| 20:28:32 | noonedeadpunk | well, I'm probably even ok that cell name is not unique. I just see no reason in adding cells with same name, transport_url and database_connection | |
| 20:28:32 | noonedeadpunk | well, I'm probably even ok that cell name is not unique. I just see no reason in adding cells with same name, transport_url and database_connection | |
| 20:28:34 | dansmith | but no I dunno any reason to or not to be unique on name for any reason | |
| 20:28:34 | dansmith | but no I dunno any reason to or not to be unique on name for any reason | |
| 20:29:07 | dansmith | noonedeadpunk: well, we had initially talked about sharding on the db but not the mq, or vice versa, | |
| 20:29:07 | dansmith | noonedeadpunk: well, we had initially talked about sharding on the db but not the mq, or vice versa, | |
| 20:29:12 | dansmith | so I think that's why we didn't make those unique | |
| 20:29:12 | dansmith | so I think that's why we didn't make those unique | |
| 20:29:41 | noonedeadpunk | And there's an attempt to avoid that with condition and raising `The specified transport_url and/or database_connection combination already exists for another cell with uuid ef89aebc-142d-4755-a377-6ed23b6c1ed4.` | |
| 20:29:41 | noonedeadpunk | And there's an attempt to avoid that with condition and raising `The specified transport_url and/or database_connection combination already exists for another cell with uuid ef89aebc-142d-4755-a377-6ed23b6c1ed4.` | |
| 20:29:42 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i was debating if this was for some kind of loadbalancing | |
| 20:29:42 | dansmith | however, I think we'd have work to do before that would actually work | |
| 20:29:42 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i was debating if this was for some kind of loadbalancing | |
| 20:29:42 | dansmith | however, I think we'd have work to do before that would actually work | |
| 20:29:43 | dansmith | at least testing | |
| 20:29:43 | dansmith | at least testing | |
| 20:30:45 | sean-k-mooney | kind of like the way you can list multple glance? rabbnit? instances in the config instead of using haproxy | |
| 20:30:45 | sean-k-mooney | kind of like the way you can list multple glance? rabbnit? instances in the config instead of using haproxy | |
| 20:31:04 | dansmith | no, that was never the reasoning for lack of uniqueness that I recall, | |
| 20:31:04 | dansmith | no, that was never the reasoning for lack of uniqueness that I recall, | |
| 20:31:06 | dansmith | more the opposite, | |
| 20:31:06 | dansmith | more the opposite, | |
| 20:31:25 | dansmith | where you wanted to be able to have two DBs and not two MQs or the like | |
| 20:31:25 | dansmith | where you wanted to be able to have two DBs and not two MQs or the like | |
| 20:31:25 | sean-k-mooney | ok | |
| 20:31:59 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: in any case i guess you need to figure out why you are creatin gmultiple cells | |
| 20:31:59 | sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: in any case i guess you need to figure out why you are creatin gmultiple cells | |