Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-11-30
19:39:06 gmann as of now
19:39:19 dansmith yup
19:39:27 sean-k-mooney well default to roles=None
19:39:39 sean-k-mooney rather then []
19:39:40 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Introduce 'admin' policy base rule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/819389
19:39:49 sean-k-mooney sicne you should not use mutable defaults but same effect
19:39:56 gmann dansmith: ^^ this is for 'admin' basically renaming 'context_is_admin' to 'admin'
19:40:02 dansmith sean-k-mooney: did you look at the patch? :)
19:40:11 dansmith gmann: cool thanks
19:40:24 sean-k-mooney nope just saw the converstaion scroll by
19:40:43 dansmith sean-k-mooney: trying not to take offense that you think I don't know not to use mutable defaults :)
19:41:50 sean-k-mooney :)
19:42:58 sean-k-mooney i still see it in code often enough but ya you already did it the right way https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/819907/3/nova/tests/functional/api/client.py#140
19:49:52 gmann I think we have hacking rule for that.
20:13:37 dansmith gmann: I don't think your admin patch works for me by itself,
20:13:44 dansmith since it's still requiring role:admin, which isn't what we have today
20:13:56 dansmith it needs to be is_admin in order to work as-is right?
20:24:52 gmann dansmith: context set is_admin based on this rule itself https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/d630615a02469442fb50ed4aa7e092206a28166a/nova/context.py#L138
20:24:58 gmann https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/819389/4/nova/policy.py
20:29:16 gmann but as it is two level deprecated rule combined I hope each one is logical ORed by oslo policy. but is it failing on your patch? if so then we can avoid to rename it for now. and add DEPRECATED_ADMIN_POLICY in is_context_admin rule only
20:39:49 gmann dansmith: yeah, i ran your patch with my change and it does not work. oslo policy add only one level of deprecated rule in logical OR.
20:40:56 gmann dansmith: I will abandon my patch and let's rename CONTEXT_ADMIN to ADMIN in your patch but keeping rule:is_context_admin. commented in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/816206/comment/543216d1_15fecfb1/
21:43:47 dansmith gmann: okay, but that's not enough, it needs to be "role:admin or is_admin:True"
21:44:21 dansmith so do you want me to do that on context_is_admin with a deprecated_rule= or add it to admin_api?
21:44:51 gmann dansmith: yeah that will add ORed both
21:45:59 gmann dansmith: yeah deprecated_rule=DEPRECATED_ADMIN_POLICY .
21:46:13 dansmith okay that's not enough either, I need this: https://termbin.com/bnqh
21:46:15 dansmith you okay with that?
21:46:27 dansmith oh wait
21:46:37 dansmith it's enough to use it as-is for today, you're right
21:46:45 dansmith I'm thinking this needs to work for both old and new, but not as of this patch
21:46:58 dansmith so yeah, I will just add the deprecated_admin_policy there
21:47:12 gmann if you do this then it should ADMIN = 'rule:context_is_admin'
21:47:58 dansmith yep, hadn't saved that before paste :)
21:48:31 dansmith running all the tests now, but expect this to work now
21:48:40 gmann dansmith: so with that you do not need this right? 'check_str='is_admin:True or role:admin','
21:48:52 dansmith correct, for just this patch, I don't
21:48:59 gmann yeah.
21:50:40 dansmith there are just too many balls in the air with this stuff for my tiny brain :D
23:06:26 artom dansmith, for the record, I'm painfully aware of the door that your last line opened, but am steadfastly refusing to step through it
23:06:54 dansmith artom: lol, I *literally* almost pinged you, asking if you wanted to do the mriedem thing in his stead :D
23:07:48 artom I'm all grown up now
23:08:33 dansmith riiight
23:09:09 artom No really, I'm organizing expensive calls and everything :P
23:37:08 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Allow per-context rule in error messages https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/816865
23:37:08 opendevreview Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Revert project-specific APIs for servers https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/816206
23:42:42 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Convert SYSTEM_ADMIN|READER to Admin and system scope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/819390
23:44:28 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Convert SYSTEM_ADMIN|READER to Admin and system scope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/819390
23:44:33 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Convert SYSTEM_ADMIN|READER to Admin and system scope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/819390
#openstack-nova - 2021-12-01
02:29:47 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Convert SYSTEM_ADMIN|READER to Admin and system scope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/819390
08:42:49 luk4s Good morning all
08:44:07 luk4s We enabled tenant isolation with placement https://docs.openstack.org/nova/wallaby/admin/aggregates.html#tenant-isolation-with-placement and have two aggregates: one for private tenants and one for generic use.
08:45:55 luk4s For private tenants we want the allocations to happened first on the private aggregate and when that is full we want to move on to the generic one once the private one is full.
08:46:14 luk4s Is this possible?
08:48:23 luk4s I have added the relevant project id to both aggregates, but the allocation is a little bit random. Can priority/weight be assigned to prioritise one over other, i.e. always prioritise the private over generic one.
09:46:19 bauzas luk4s: hola
09:46:37 bauzas luk4s: so you want to stack first for one aggregate and then another one ?
09:49:34 luk4s bauzas, yes.
09:51:11 luk4s i.e. always fill up private aggregate first before moving on to the generic one.
09:51:13 bauzas for this tenant ?
09:51:37 bauzas if so, you need a weigher
09:52:32 luk4s I have already looked at that but it looks like existing weighters may not do what I want - I presume I would have to write a new one?
09:53:53 luk4s would like to avoid writing one if possible :)
09:57:32 bauzas luk4s: AFAIK, there are no ways to tell Nova to do this for the moment
09:58:50 luk4s bauzas, cheers and thank you for the information
09:59:10 luk4s I mean thank you for the information :)
11:14:28 bauzas cores, a documentation change simple https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/814561
12:59:57 stephenfin gibi: care to send https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/814561 on its way
12:59:58 stephenfin ?
13:07:39 sean-k-mooney stephenfin: has you mock to unittest.mock patch merged yet
13:07:53 brinzhang_ gmann: hi, would you like to review the series of remove tenant_id patches https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bp%252Fremove-tenant-id%22+(status:open%20OR%20status:merged)
13:08:33 sean-k-mooney hum no https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/714676 oh takashi thing its causing nova.tests.unit.api.openstack.test_wsgi_app.WSGIAppTest.test_init_application_called_twice to fail
13:36:26 gibi bauzas, stephenfin: on itr
13:38:55 gibi done
13:49:55 bauzas gibi: t
13:49:58 bauzas ta even
14:16:03 artom Am I the only one for whom `git review -d` appears to timeout?
14:16:20 sean-k-mooney which review
14:16:22 sean-k-mooney ill try it
14:16:47 artom sean-k-mooney, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin/+/805300, but presumably if it's a gerrit issue it would be all reviews
14:17:21 sean-k-mooney just worked
14:18:00 artom Just me then? That's annoying
14:19:05 artom The hell, it's as though all Python IO is b0rk
14:19:07 sean-k-mooney i assume you have the corfrect url
14:19:09 sean-k-mooney gerrit ssh://sean-k-mooney@review.opendev.org:29418/openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin
14:19:16 artom pip install --upgrade --user git-review does the same thing
14:19:18 sean-k-mooney with your user name
14:19:27 sean-k-mooney are you out of disk space
14:19:31 artom Or just... super slow
14:19:41 artom No...
14:34:59 artom So that worked, though I had to disable IPv6 after rebooting to be able to connect here
14:54:41 sean-k-mooney ipv6 might have been the issue
14:54:47 sean-k-mooney if you dont have native ipv6
15:02:21 pslestang Hey all, what's the next step once we created a blueprint? https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/delete-instance-actions
15:08:33 sean-k-mooney pslestang: in this case since its requesting a config option not a api change it can be added to the team meeting adgenda and you can request this to be done as a specless blueprint
15:09:28 sean-k-mooney pslestang: if that is approved then you just submit a patch referince the bluepirnt in the commit and topic "bp/delete-instance-actions" with a release note and docs for the new feature
15:10:22 sean-k-mooney pslestang: if its determined that we have upgrade conscerns or other topics that need detailed discussion then we would ask for a spec to discuss the desgin but i dont think that will be required in this case
15:11:16 pslestang sean-k-mooney: thanks for your answer, how can I add it to the meeting agenda?
15:17:04 sean-k-mooney edit https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova and add it to the open discussion section
15:17:07 pslestang sean-k-mooney: ok I just edited https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova I guess that the way to add it to the agenda

Earlier   Later