| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-09-24 | |||
| 14:03:44 | sean-k-mooney | no rush we have time before the ptg | |
| 14:04:07 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: speaking of which i assuem you are going to take the etherpad and turn it into an adgenda at some point | |
| 14:04:10 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I just closed an escalation I have a lot of motivation :D | |
| 14:05:09 | sean-k-mooney | thats alwasy a nice feeling espically on a friday | |
| 14:05:55 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: by the way i have only been skimming what happing with setuptool. are we any closer to a decision on what to do for the stable branches | |
| 14:07:05 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: yup will work on it | |
| 14:07:11 | bauzas | (the agenda) | |
| 14:07:37 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I have a solution based on you idea of [tox]requires config that proved to be working. It seems others are more for dropping lower constraints testing althogheter which is fine by me. | |
| 14:08:20 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: however a recent mail might means that we have the same issue outside of lower constraint testing http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-September/025040.html | |
| 14:08:27 | sean-k-mooney | ok and are we going to look into the project.yaml or what ever the new thing is for yoga on? | |
| 14:08:49 | gibi | pyproject.yaml is the thing but honestly I has not time to look into that as a direction | |
| 14:09:02 | gibi | I assume it also needs some common agreement in OpenStack | |
| 14:09:10 | sean-k-mooney | ya we proably should not be using any deps that rely on use_2to3 realistically in ussuri | |
| 14:09:22 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: yep we would | |
| 14:09:31 | sean-k-mooney | it would fundemtally change how we do dep managment | |
| 14:09:52 | sean-k-mooney | its a replacment for requirements.txt and tox.ini all wrapped into one file | |
| 14:10:07 | sean-k-mooney | i think it can still use the other but its basically one file to rule them all | |
| 14:12:54 | gibi | OK then it is definitely bigger that I can chew right now | |
| 14:13:09 | sean-k-mooney | yep it is | |
| 14:15:26 | gibi | and it is Friday :) | |
| 14:17:11 | priteau | Hello. Who has rights to update the Nova bug template on LP? I noticed an issue with the rpm command. | |
| 14:17:24 | priteau | See https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/BugsTeam/BugReportTemplate | |
| 14:17:38 | priteau | `rpm -ql | grep <projectname>` should be `rpm -qa | grep <projectname>` | |
| 14:18:45 | gibi | priteau: I think anybody can edit the wiki I'm not sure about LP | |
| 14:19:15 | priteau | I can make the wiki edit of course, but what matters is syncing with LP ;-) | |
| 14:19:53 | gibi | priteau: I found I can update the LP | |
| 14:20:10 | gibi | let me know what needs to be fixed and I will do it in LP | |
| 14:20:21 | gibi | ahh I see what is needed | |
| 14:20:35 | priteau | I've updated the wiki page | |
| 14:21:59 | gibi | hm, do we need both -a and -l ? | |
| 14:23:07 | gibi | is -l a shortcut for --last ? | |
| 14:23:11 | gibi | (I'm on debian :D)_ | |
| 14:23:16 | sean-k-mooney | we proably should jsut remove it from the template | |
| 14:23:44 | sean-k-mooney | i think for deb packages -l is for list | |
| 14:23:47 | sean-k-mooney | i can check | |
| 14:24:00 | priteau | Just -qa | |
| 14:24:07 | priteau | -ql is for listing files inside a package | |
| 14:24:15 | priteau | -l, --list | |
| 14:24:15 | priteau | List files in package. | |
| 14:24:29 | gibi | ohh OK then -a it is | |
| 14:24:49 | gibi | fixed the LP | |
| 14:24:56 | gibi | priteau: thanks for reporting it | |
| 14:24:58 | sean-k-mooney | yes -qa | |
| 14:25:16 | sean-k-mooney | but really we dont care about the package version most of the time we just care about the openstack version | |
| 14:25:59 | priteau | This is an easy way to find the version when using binary packages | |
| 14:26:01 | sean-k-mooney | we care for libvirt and qemu sometimes but we porably could make it more generic | |
| 14:26:16 | sean-k-mooney | priteau: right but upstream that normally not useful | |
| 14:26:29 | sean-k-mooney | since we cant easially map it to the source code | |
| 14:27:02 | sean-k-mooney | even downstream the pacakge version is not very useful since that mapping is hard to do | |
| 14:27:32 | sean-k-mooney | we often have to pull the srouce rpm and check if a patch is in it which is a pain | |
| 14:29:01 | sean-k-mooney | priteau: by the way the template also tells you to run udo sosreport -o openstack_nova --batch | |
| 14:29:12 | sean-k-mooney | which i dont think i have ever seen peopl actully do | |
| 14:29:20 | priteau | Who follows instructions? :) | |
| 14:29:34 | priteau | Would you like people to use `pip3 list | grep nova` as an alternative? | |
| 14:30:08 | sean-k-mooney | not nessisarly but its helpful if they clearly state that they used train or the serise name | |
| 14:30:16 | opendevreview | Lucian Petrut proposed openstack/nova master: api: enable oslo.reports when using uwsgi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810922 | |
| 14:30:27 | sean-k-mooney | knowing the disto and or package version is nice too | |
| 14:32:05 | priteau | I imagine knowing the release tag can be quite useful | |
| 14:32:15 | opendevreview | Lucian Petrut proposed openstack/nova master: api: enable oslo.reports when using uwsgi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810922 | |
| 14:32:44 | gibi | just yesterday I troubleshooted a deployment with nova_compute version 22.2.3 :D | |
| 14:33:08 | lpetrut | hi, I'm hitting some nova api deadlocks and noticed that oslo.reports isn't enabled when using uwsgi so I've submitted a small commit: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810922 | |
| 14:33:16 | gibi | (note that we only released 22.2.2 upstream) | |
| 14:33:48 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ya i was going to say was this in the gate :) | |
| 14:34:19 | sean-k-mooney | cause otherwise they are going to have fun when we do the next stable release | |
| 14:34:50 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: it was downstream. I think what they did is they took what was unreleased from stable/victoria and created 22.2.3 out of it downstream | |
| 14:35:10 | sean-k-mooney | i see | |
| 14:35:26 | gibi | which is problematic as you said | |
| 14:35:32 | gibi | lpetrut: seems useful | |
| 14:35:59 | gibi | lpetrut: thanks | |
| 14:36:33 | sean-k-mooney | huh | |
| 14:37:19 | sean-k-mooney | maybe that is why the GMR were not working instead of what we tought with the signal being intercpted by uwsgi/mod_wsgi | |
| 14:37:42 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: or we need both :) | |
| 14:37:52 | sean-k-mooney | lpetrut: i assume you tested this and it logs the GMR to the log properly on kill -usr2 | |
| 14:38:24 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ya i was wonderign if that would only work if you set the signal to the python interpreter instnace | |
| 14:39:17 | gibi | unfortunately this is pretty complicated to test upstream. | |
| 14:39:22 | lpetrut | sean-k-mooney: the signal still gets intercepted but I'm using a file listener | |
| 14:39:47 | gibi | I mean automatically testing it | |
| 14:39:48 | sean-k-mooney | lpetrut: intercepted by uwsgi and not passed to nova right | |
| 14:40:04 | sean-k-mooney | lpetrut: oh are you poking a file to trigger it | |
| 14:40:14 | sean-k-mooney | instead of sig_usr2 or soemthing | |
| 14:40:38 | lpetrut | yep, I'm setting something like oslo_reports.file_event_handler = /opt/stack/logs/trigger | |
| 14:40:48 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: we could proably add a func test but we would have to expand the test scope | |
| 14:40:57 | sean-k-mooney | lpetrut: ok i dont think we technially support that in nova | |
| 14:41:07 | sean-k-mooney | but it certenly works around the issue | |
| 14:41:27 | lpetrut | it already works with most nova services, they key is to pass the config when calling the gmr hook | |
| 14:41:30 | sean-k-mooney | so this is really a mini feature rather then a bug | |
| 14:41:34 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: do we run nova-api in uwsgi in func test? | |
| 14:41:56 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: no but we coudl do somehting like neutorn fullstack tests | |
| 14:42:03 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: ack, that is a possibility | |
| 14:42:04 | sean-k-mooney | it would be a different type of test | |
| 14:42:20 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: or add this to nova-next post test hook | |
| 14:42:33 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ya that too | |
| 14:43:00 | gibi | bauzas, sean-k-mooney: btw I confirm that neutron also leaks inventories if the bw or pps config is removed | |
| 14:43:16 | sean-k-mooney | lpetrut: did you want to backport udo sosreport -o openstack_nova --batch | |
| 14:43:24 | sean-k-mooney | * https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810922/2/nova/api/openstack/wsgi_app.py | |
| 14:43:52 | sean-k-mooney | to me this is really a specless blueprint | |
| 14:43:58 | sean-k-mooney | so not something we woudl backport | |
| 14:44:18 | sean-k-mooney | i think its a nice change to merge so no real objection to the patch | |
| 14:45:02 | sean-k-mooney | just not sure this is a bug and a spec is way to heavy weight so not sure how to track this | |
| 14:45:23 | sean-k-mooney | to me its really just a trivial fix but it proably should have a release note | |