| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-01-17 | |||
| 15:20:10 | sean-k-mooney | yep but there is no other property you can currently pass in the dict | |
| 15:20:32 | bauzas | yeah, that's why I'm asking to remove this for the new API microversion also adding the new argument | |
| 15:20:41 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: correct, for the moment | |
| 15:20:43 | sean-k-mooney | artom it would have to be the litral value null potentailly but this is not the only place where its slightly odd | |
| 15:20:55 | gibi | I think both unshelve to an AZ or unshelve to a specific host make sense | |
| 15:21:16 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: but once Uggla will add a new key like "host", that would mean that the AZ key should be required | |
| 15:21:29 | sean-k-mooney | yep likely you dont need to sepcify both but if you did we shoudl vlaidated the host to az relationship | |
| 15:21:43 | artom | No...? Having to specify both host and AZ seems weird | |
| 15:21:51 | artom | I'd say one or the other, but not both? | |
| 15:21:53 | bauzas | that's why I'm saying we should remove the requiring when we modify this API | |
| 15:22:11 | bauzas | in a new microversion of course | |
| 15:22:15 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: well as currently specified but in generally unshele:{"host":"my-host"} | |
| 15:22:20 | sean-k-mooney | i think shoudl be valid | |
| 15:22:21 | artom | To my mind what would be clearest is: either empty body, or AZ with a non-null value, or host with a non-null value | |
| 15:22:22 | bauzas | anyway, let's wait Uggla to provide his spec for Z :) | |
| 15:22:32 | sean-k-mooney | i dont think we shoudl required Az if the host is passed | |
| 15:22:38 | gibi | artom: ++ | |
| 15:22:43 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: agreed, that's my concern | |
| 15:22:54 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/1ddb8f83adef964a8ca050994a43adc6175994f1/nova/api/openstack/compute/schemas/shelve.py#L31 doesn't accept it for the moment | |
| 15:23:03 | bauzas | so we need to remove this line | |
| 15:23:16 | bauzas | with a new microversion and when adding a new argument | |
| 15:23:17 | sean-k-mooney | yes in the new microverion | |
| 15:23:26 | sean-k-mooney | in the current one it shoudl remain | |
| 15:23:32 | bauzas | ok, anyway, I think we have a consensus | |
| 15:23:45 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: of course, I know it | |
| 15:24:00 | sean-k-mooney | yep just make sure Uggla captures it in the spec for next cycle | |
| 15:24:01 | bauzas | I was asking whether it was ok to remove the line at the same time we add a new argument | |
| 15:24:11 | sean-k-mooney | i assume they will start working on the implemantion in parallel | |
| 15:24:26 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: correct, I discussed that with him :) | |
| 15:24:36 | bauzas | anyway, consensus, that's it | |
| 15:24:39 | bauzas | it was just a question | |
| 15:24:42 | bauzas | a simple one | |
| 15:25:53 | sean-k-mooney | yep i broght that up as we have not created the new spec dir yet but Uggla can totally do that and we can review the spec | |
| 15:26:26 | Uggla | cool, I'll work on this way. | |
| 15:26:32 | sean-k-mooney | but ya my vote is for make it not required and supprot null as well | |
| 15:30:33 | Uggla | passing both option, do you think that passing host should "discard" az | |
| 15:30:40 | Uggla | passing both options, do you think that passing host should "discard" az | |
| 15:31:25 | Uggla | I mean whatever we will have in az will be ignored if host is passed. | |
| 15:31:42 | Uggla | I mean whatever we will have in az will be ignored if host is passed ? | |
| 15:32:13 | gibi | Uggla: no, I think we should not ignore input. we either forbid both to be passed at once, or we should validate that the host is in the az | |
| 15:32:36 | gibi | I more with artom, to forbid to pass both in the same request | |
| 15:33:19 | sean-k-mooney | well either we validate that the host is in the az or it should be an error to pass both in my view | |
| 15:33:37 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I agree | |
| 15:34:02 | Uggla | ok probably simpler to make it an error. | |
| 15:34:12 | sean-k-mooney | yep simple 400 | |
| 15:34:24 | sean-k-mooney | no existing client will pass host | |
| 15:34:43 | sean-k-mooney | and when optinign into the new microversion they can ensure that only one is generated | |
| 15:35:34 | Uggla | Is it possible to do this kind of exclusive or parameters in the schema validation ? | |
| 15:35:48 | sean-k-mooney | yes | |
| 15:36:03 | artom | Right, but why do more work when less work is enough? :) | |
| 15:37:13 | sean-k-mooney | im pretty sure there is a way to defeint them as a mutualy exclucive group | |
| 15:37:30 | sean-k-mooney | i just cant think of a place off the top of my head whwere we actully do that | |
| 15:37:43 | sean-k-mooney | i suspect this si normally check after the scheme validation | |
| 15:39:32 | Uggla | Is making both options ok in schema validation and then doing the exclusive part in the code, sounds ok ? | |
| 15:39:38 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/1ddb8f83adef964a8ca050994a43adc6175994f1/nova/api/openstack/compute/schemas/servers.py#L172-L173 | |
| 15:39:45 | sean-k-mooney | oneOf | |
| 15:40:09 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney, nice thank you ! | |
| 15:40:42 | sean-k-mooney | as i said we rearly enforce that in teh scheme but no one will object if you do it either | |
| 15:41:40 | sean-k-mooney | there are some other exampels in the samee file | |
| 15:41:41 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/1ddb8f83adef964a8ca050994a43adc6175994f1/nova/api/openstack/compute/schemas/servers.py#L281-L298 | |
| 15:42:58 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I'll create the specs directory once we know the Z name :) | |
| 15:43:26 | bauzas | unless I name it 'zombie' directly :p | |
| 15:45:24 | sean-k-mooney | oh ya good point | |
| 15:46:29 | sean-k-mooney | i still quite like "zenith" cause its all down hill from there | |
| 15:53:16 | gmann | bauzas: gibi sean-k-mooney Uggla artom yeah, we can remove the AZ from being 'required' from schema now as it will ne extended to accepting 'host' too. AZ was added as 'required' because this API only accept None or AZ and no other field but that is handled by additionalProperties=False so 'required' is not needed as such. | |
| 15:54:09 | gmann | bauzas: I think you will be right about 'zombie' :) everyone liking it :) | |
| 15:56:36 | sean-k-mooney | if its is zombie we shoudl make it a base for a downstream realse | |
| 15:57:01 | sean-k-mooney | because a decade form now we will still have once custoemr that refuses to move off it and it will never die | |
| 15:57:10 | sean-k-mooney | like any good zombie :) | |
| 15:58:02 | gmann | :) | |
| 15:59:52 | sean-k-mooney | osp 18 actuly should either be the z release of a release depending on timeing so maybe that will happen anyway | |
| 16:00:12 | sean-k-mooney | *Z release or A release | |
| 16:00:59 | bauzas | A = Awesome release I guess | |
| 16:01:17 | bauzas | easy peasy | |
| 16:01:28 | sean-k-mooney | B = Buffy to help with the zombie problem ? | |
| 16:02:01 | bauzas | C = Chilly | |
| 16:02:14 | bauzas | D = Draughful | |
| 16:03:51 | Uggla | I like B especially if Z is zombie ! | |
| 16:14:36 | Uggla | Sarah Michelle Gellar was so cute. | |
| 16:15:55 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: ensure samples folder exists for microversion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/813672 | |
| 17:39:16 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: libvirt: Ensure all volume drivers log the instance whenever possible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/780260 | |
| 18:17:22 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: functional: Add reproducer for #1907775 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/766771 | |
| 19:44:05 | ade_lee | sean-k-mooney, lyarwood hey guys, I updated the fips job to include the full set of tempest tests and there were quite a few more failures -- can you guys take a look? | |
| 19:44:12 | ade_lee | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/790519 | |
| 19:45:44 | ade_lee | cinder folks are looking into other potential problems with volumes / cryptsetup here -- https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/790535 so some of the failures may be related to that. | |
| 19:46:30 | sean-k-mooney | sure | |
| 19:47:05 | sean-k-mooney | have the general centos8 gate issue been fixed | |
| 19:47:17 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. the fact they broke ping | |
| 19:47:23 | sean-k-mooney | making it require root to run | |
| 19:47:55 | ade_lee | sean-k-mooney, not sure .. that woud certainly muddy things | |
| 19:48:14 | ade_lee | fungi, clarkb ^^ any idea? | |
| 19:49:01 | fungi | sean-k-mooney: ade_lee: i don't know if red hat has fixed centos stream 8's packages yet | |
| 19:49:42 | sean-k-mooney | the fips failrues might be unrealtaed but that is breaking all centos8 stream jobs currently right | |
| 19:49:45 | fungi | technically, centos stream 8 was (maybe still is) broken/regressed. i recommend not relying on it since it doesn't seem like they actually test it like they did the old centos | |
| 19:50:18 | sean-k-mooney | fungi: for what its worth i agree with not working aroudn this in our jobs | |
| 19:50:21 | fungi | i think there's work underway to get rocky linux added, and we have openeuler though it sounds like it may have a slightly too old kernel for the fips testing | |
| 19:50:50 | sean-k-mooney | fungi: really centos 8 stream should be fixed and maintianed as if it was rhel | |
| 19:51:36 | sean-k-mooney | ade_lee: qemu-kvm: -accel tcg: mprotect of jit buffer: Cannot allocate memory | |
| 19:51:36 | fungi | rocky or alma seems like it might be a better option if centos stream is going to be the unstable hopper where free users get to find the bugs and tell red hat what to fix before they tag a new release of their commercial product | |
| 19:52:41 | sean-k-mooney | fungi: as someone who has to maintain said product if they dont keep centos stream stable i will continue to do all my dev on ubuntu | |