| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-05-06 | |||
| 10:48:05 | sean-k-mooney | i prefer hostnames but that is just a preference | |
| 10:48:05 | sean-k-mooney | i prefer hostnames but that is just a preference | |
| 10:48:52 | sean-k-mooney | the delta in function ality is fqdns allows host-1.rack-1.mydomain and host-1.rack-2.mydomain to work | |
| 10:48:52 | sean-k-mooney | the delta in function ality is fqdns allows host-1.rack-1.mydomain and host-1.rack-2.mydomain to work | |
| 10:49:13 | sean-k-mooney | where as hostnames only requires tehm all to be unique | |
| 10:49:13 | sean-k-mooney | where as hostnames only requires tehm all to be unique | |
| 10:49:32 | gibi | yepp, I see the need for FQDNs in big deployments | |
| 10:49:32 | gibi | yepp, I see the need for FQDNs in big deployments | |
| 10:49:42 | gibi | or at least accept the need | |
| 10:49:42 | gibi | or at least accept the need | |
| 10:50:05 | sean-k-mooney | the only issue if we use FQDNs only is sometime we will still end up with hostnames | |
| 10:50:05 | sean-k-mooney | the only issue if we use FQDNs only is sometime we will still end up with hostnames | |
| 10:50:25 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. if you dont have the FQDN in /etc/hosts | |
| 10:50:25 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. if you dont have the FQDN in /etc/hosts | |
| 10:51:03 | sean-k-mooney | well that and we told all the other service to use socket.gethostname() | |
| 10:51:03 | sean-k-mooney | well that and we told all the other service to use socket.gethostname() | |
| 10:51:46 | sean-k-mooney | i even changed cyborg to use gethostnaem form getfqdn https://github.com/openstack/cyborg/commit/ec0eab0ffb4fc18574dbd937f29545832d317e4c | |
| 10:51:46 | sean-k-mooney | i even changed cyborg to use gethostnaem form getfqdn https://github.com/openstack/cyborg/commit/ec0eab0ffb4fc18574dbd937f29545832d317e4c | |
| 10:51:53 | sean-k-mooney | after that intial email thread | |
| 10:51:53 | sean-k-mooney | after that intial email thread | |
| 10:53:08 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: part of me feels like we should add a fucntion to oslo.utils | |
| 10:53:08 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: part of me feels like we should add a fucntion to oslo.utils | |
| 10:53:14 | sean-k-mooney | and then just have everyone use that | |
| 10:53:15 | sean-k-mooney | and then just have everyone use that | |
| 10:53:50 | sean-k-mooney | and then in nova we can perhaps think about have a reshape or soemthing to normalise the RPs | |
| 10:53:50 | sean-k-mooney | and then in nova we can perhaps think about have a reshape or soemthing to normalise the RPs | |
| 10:54:15 | gibi | I think you can rename without reshape | |
| 10:54:15 | sean-k-mooney | the fact this currently depend on the virt driver you use is less then ideal. | |
| 10:54:15 | gibi | I think you can rename without reshape | |
| 10:54:16 | sean-k-mooney | the fact this currently depend on the virt driver you use is less then ideal. | |
| 10:54:26 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ya i think you are right | |
| 10:54:26 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ya i think you are right | |
| 10:54:31 | sean-k-mooney | the allocation dont need to move | |
| 10:54:31 | sean-k-mooney | the allocation dont need to move | |
| 10:54:35 | gibi | yepp | |
| 10:55:14 | sean-k-mooney | what we can do its encode the libvirt logic which is in the neutron patch in an oslo patch | |
| 10:55:14 | sean-k-mooney | what we can do its encode the libvirt logic which is in the neutron patch in an oslo patch | |
| 10:55:20 | sean-k-mooney | and then use that | |
| 10:55:20 | sean-k-mooney | and then use that | |
| 10:55:42 | sean-k-mooney | for libvirt at least it woudl not change behaivor and for other driver i suspect it wont either | |
| 10:55:42 | sean-k-mooney | for libvirt at least it woudl not change behaivor and for other driver i suspect it wont either | |
| 10:55:56 | gibi | I cannot comment on other drivers cases | |
| 10:55:56 | gibi | I cannot comment on other drivers cases | |
| 10:56:11 | sean-k-mooney | well ironic they use the ironic node uuid as the name right? | |
| 10:56:11 | sean-k-mooney | well ironic they use the ironic node uuid as the name right? | |
| 10:56:32 | sean-k-mooney | not sure what hyperv or vmware does | |
| 10:56:32 | sean-k-mooney | not sure what hyperv or vmware does | |
| 10:56:38 | gibi | yes. but I don't know if neutron ever needs that | |
| 10:56:38 | gibi | yes. but I don't know if neutron ever needs that | |
| 10:56:49 | gibi | that = ironic node name | |
| 10:56:49 | gibi | that = ironic node name | |
| 10:56:57 | sean-k-mooney | ya the neutron agent dont run on the ironic nodes | |
| 10:56:57 | sean-k-mooney | ya the neutron agent dont run on the ironic nodes | |
| 10:57:35 | gibi | I have to jump to a call from the top of the hour | |
| 10:57:35 | gibi | I have to jump to a call from the top of the hour | |
| 10:57:50 | gibi | I linked this discussion to the neutron patch for reference | |
| 10:57:50 | gibi | I linked this discussion to the neutron patch for reference | |
| 10:57:54 | sean-k-mooney | no worries thanks for litening | |
| 10:57:54 | sean-k-mooney | no worries thanks for litening | |
| 10:58:51 | sean-k-mooney | ill try an follow up downstream and see if we can come to can concreate conclutions | |
| 10:58:51 | sean-k-mooney | ill try an follow up downstream and see if we can come to can concreate conclutions | |
| 10:59:09 | gibi | OK | |
| 10:59:34 | gibi | sorry for being dense | |
| 10:59:34 | gibi | sorry for being dense | |
| 10:59:51 | sean-k-mooney | you werent being dense | |
| 10:59:51 | sean-k-mooney | you werent being dense | |
| 10:59:58 | sean-k-mooney | it helped | |
| 10:59:58 | sean-k-mooney | it helped | |
| 11:00:55 | gibi | then I'm glad :) | |
| 11:00:55 | gibi | then I'm glad :) | |
| 12:18:18 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: would adding a new weigher need a spec. or could that be a specless blueprint | |
| 12:18:18 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: would adding a new weigher need a spec. or could that be a specless blueprint | |
| 12:18:49 | gibi | if the config of the weigher is trivial then I'm OK with a specless bp | |
| 12:18:49 | gibi | if the config of the weigher is trivial then I'm OK with a specless bp | |
| 12:19:37 | sean-k-mooney | i have 2 that i think might be useful. 1 is weighe based on the number of runing instnace and the other is a weigher that prefers the current host an instance is on | |
| 12:19:37 | sean-k-mooney | i have 2 that i think might be useful. 1 is weighe based on the number of runing instnace and the other is a weigher that prefers the current host an instance is on | |
| 12:20:59 | gibi | please note that today all the weigher is turned on by default so more weigher means a more complex behavior. | |
| 12:20:59 | gibi | please note that today all the weigher is turned on by default so more weigher means a more complex behavior. | |
| 12:21:23 | gibi | * all the weighers are | |
| 12:21:23 | gibi | * all the weighers are | |
| 12:21:59 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 12:22:20 | sean-k-mooney | we may or may not want that for these | |
| 12:22:20 | sean-k-mooney | we may or may not want that for these | |
| 12:22:44 | sean-k-mooney | basically our perf team has a bunch of hosts with differnt size for ram disk and cpu | |
| 12:22:44 | sean-k-mooney | basically our perf team has a bunch of hosts with differnt size for ram disk and cpu | |
| 12:23:11 | sean-k-mooney | and they are booting a bunch of small instance and they are all landing on 2 hosts because it has much more ram,cpu and disk then the others | |
| 12:23:11 | sean-k-mooney | and they are booting a bunch of small instance and they are all landing on 2 hosts because it has much more ram,cpu and disk then the others | |
| 12:24:36 | gibi | I think it is a valid need to have weighers that are not turned on by default | |
| 12:24:36 | gibi | I think it is a valid need to have weighers that are not turned on by default | |
| 12:24:38 | sean-k-mooney | as in the have 46 hosts and booted about 520 instace at this point and they have 2 host with 237 and 247 instances | |
| 12:24:38 | sean-k-mooney | as in the have 46 hosts and booted about 520 instace at this point and they have 2 host with 237 and 247 instances | |
| 12:25:57 | sean-k-mooney | so having a pretty dumb weither that jsut spread or packed by instances would help them. im goign to get them to set host_subset_size=46 so its just a random choice for now | |
| 12:25:57 | sean-k-mooney | so having a pretty dumb weither that jsut spread or packed by instances would help them. im goign to get them to set host_subset_size=46 so its just a random choice for now | |
| 12:26:34 | sean-k-mooney | that will get the the even distibution they want but i think it coudl be useful | |
| 12:26:34 | sean-k-mooney | that will get the the even distibution they want but i think it coudl be useful | |
| 12:27:04 | sean-k-mooney | the current host weigher would be so that people that want resize to same host to not change host could expess that preference if they really wanted too by truning on that weither | |
| 12:27:04 | sean-k-mooney | the current host weigher would be so that people that want resize to same host to not change host could expess that preference if they really wanted too by truning on that weither | |
| 12:27:51 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: im going to proably right a mini spec for moveing some of the fitlers to placmenet native approch so i could also add this there too | |
| 12:27:51 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: im going to proably right a mini spec for moveing some of the fitlers to placmenet native approch so i could also add this there too | |
| 12:28:14 | gibi | hm, I think if allow_resize_to_same_host=False then we add the scheduler will ignore the current host | |