| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-05-09 | |||
| 13:15:53 | gibi | I would do the refactor and call detach_inteface but I'm biased with the detach_interface code :D | |
| 13:16:12 | sean-k-mooney | well see i trust the detach_inteface code more | |
| 13:16:19 | sean-k-mooney | its better tested | |
| 13:17:06 | sean-k-mooney | ok thanks ill try and confirm my sepculation that suspend was broken and file a bug | |
| 13:17:11 | gibi | cool | |
| 13:18:10 | sean-k-mooney | one thing i need to bring up in the team meeting tomorrow is how to track the vdpa work | |
| 13:18:26 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bug%252F1970467 the non WIP patch is the bug fix | |
| 13:18:37 | sean-k-mooney | for the move operation that actully work | |
| 13:19:00 | sean-k-mooney | the next 3 add attach/detach, suspend and hotplug live migration | |
| 13:19:16 | sean-k-mooney | i feel like the last 3 shoudl be a specless blueprint or maybe a small spec | |
| 13:27:26 | gibi | I'm OK with both direction. If there is no API change then I'm fine with specless but if you have open questions then those are easy to discuss via a spec | |
| 13:29:30 | sean-k-mooney | there are no api change other then me removing the api block on the operation however i think i should be adding a compute service version bump for live migration | |
| 13:29:39 | sean-k-mooney | to supprot rolling upgade | |
| 13:29:48 | sean-k-mooney | i dont have that in the wip code | |
| 13:31:42 | gibi | I think this still can fly as specless | |
| 13:32:14 | sean-k-mooney | ack that is what i was hoping but if other felt differently i just wanted to get the spec up quickly | |
| 13:32:55 | gibi | yeah it is worth to ask | |
| 14:36:37 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova-specs master: PCI device tracking in Placement https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/791047 | |
| 14:36:49 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: updated according to our discussion ^^ | |
| 16:55:19 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Microversion 2.91: Support specifying destination host to unshelve https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/831651 | |
| 17:24:26 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Test aborting queued live migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/836145 | |
| 17:24:34 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Add functional tests to reproduce bug #1960412 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/836146 | |
| 17:24:41 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Clean up when queued live migration aborted https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/836147 | |
| 19:05:11 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova stable/yoga: Retry in CellDatabases fixture when global DB state changes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/840734 | |
| 21:26:02 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug 1952745 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841170 | |
| 21:26:44 | artom | I'm kinda proud of ^^ | |
| 21:36:49 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug 1952745 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841170 | |
| 21:41:36 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova master: Reproduce bug 1952745 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841170 | |
| 23:55:07 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: Define new functional test tox env for placement gate to run https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/840771 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-05-10 | |||
| 00:14:23 | opendevreview | Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/nova master: Fix race condition in _get_pci_passthrough_devices https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/840993 | |
| 00:18:47 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/osc-placement master: Remove six https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-placement/+/841181 | |
| 01:03:40 | opendevreview | Jorhson Deng proposed openstack/nova master: Clear the ignore_hosts before starting evacuate https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841089 | |
| 05:34:57 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/placement stable/ussuri: Use 'functional-without-sample-db-tests' tox env for placement nova job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/840773 | |
| 05:34:58 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/placement stable/ussuri: placement-status: check only consumers in allocation table https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/840703 | |
| 07:39:41 | Uggla | Hello nova o/ | |
| 07:41:26 | gibi | Uggla: o/ | |
| 07:41:35 | gibi | happy spec review day :) | |
| 08:14:13 | sean-k-mooney | ah yes | |
| 08:14:25 | sean-k-mooney | well i guess i know what im doing today then | |
| 08:14:51 | bauzas | gibi: indeed, thanks for explaining it | |
| 08:16:39 | bauzas | starting out loud with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840217 for people | |
| 08:17:25 | sean-k-mooney | opened in a tab ill get to it after i do a pass on the pci spec and the manilla shares spec. | |
| 08:18:35 | sean-k-mooney | just an fyi for people my arbiter spec need a respin with some largeish changes so you can ignore it for now. i might push it back up later today | |
| 08:18:49 | opendevreview | Jorhson Deng proposed openstack/nova master: Clear the ignore_hosts before starting evacuate https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841089 | |
| 08:24:28 | bauzas | Uggla: I'm afraid that unshelve modifies the RequestSpec.az field :( | |
| 08:24:47 | bauzas | it shouldn't I think | |
| 08:24:51 | bauzas | but this is a bug | |
| 08:24:59 | bauzas | not your spec | |
| 08:26:41 | Uggla | bauzas, hum no from what I checked it seems the behavior is fine. Or I may miss what you mean. | |
| 08:29:51 | Uggla | I had some tests here maybe it will clarify: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/831507/7/nova/tests/functional/test_availability_zones.py | |
| 08:30:49 | Uggla | bauzas, BTW I added tests to unshelve to an az that were missing. | |
| 08:32:44 | bauzas | Uggla: added my comments | |
| 08:33:04 | bauzas | now, I see why a lof of our customers prefer unshelve... | |
| 08:33:12 | bauzas | because of the open bug | |
| 08:33:37 | bauzas | I'm saying this is a bug, as this *shouldn't* | |
| 08:33:58 | bauzas | be possible to move an instance out of AZ1 if the user asked AZ1 when creating the instance | |
| 08:34:20 | bauzas | as a reminder, availability zones are seen by end users | |
| 08:35:38 | bauzas | Uggla: sean-k-mooney: for example, say I'm a enduser and I want to create an instance in some OVH SBG4 AZ :) | |
| 08:36:04 | bauzas | (where only hosts within the SBG4 datacenter are within this AZ) | |
| 08:36:23 | bauzas | then, I see some problems with SBG4 | |
| 08:36:41 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: unshelve intentionally allwos you to chagne AZ | |
| 08:37:01 | bauzas | but magically, now I look at my instance and I see it in RBX1 | |
| 08:37:11 | bauzas | I wonder why | |
| 08:37:14 | sean-k-mooney | unshleve wont change az by default | |
| 08:37:27 | sean-k-mooney | it only change az if you specify an az | |
| 08:37:35 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I don't see why this is intentional | |
| 08:37:38 | bauzas | this is rather a bug | |
| 08:37:44 | sean-k-mooney | no its not | |
| 08:37:49 | sean-k-mooney | its deffinelty a feature | |
| 08:37:56 | bauzas | I strongly disagree | |
| 08:38:02 | bauzas | I know customers use it | |
| 08:38:05 | bauzas | because of this bug | |
| 08:38:19 | bauzas | but I dislike this behaviour because it tramples our endusers | |
| 08:38:21 | sean-k-mooney | unshelve is the only operation that is safe to use to move between azs | |
| 08:38:34 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: rembere that unshelve is an end user operation not an admin one | |
| 08:38:38 | bauzas | unshelve was created by Rackspace | |
| 08:38:47 | sean-k-mooney | so its the same use that spefifed it on but and unshelve | |
| 08:38:56 | bauzas | correct | |
| 08:39:18 | bauzas | but originally we just offloaded resources with keeping quotas | |
| 08:39:21 | sean-k-mooney | so they know there constratits and are able to determin if they want to move between azs | |
| 08:39:26 | bauzas | as this was a public cloud need | |
| 08:39:45 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: yes and then later we extended the api to add unshleve to AZ | |
| 08:39:46 | bauzas | as a public cloud, they wanted their endusers to keep their quotas | |
| 08:39:57 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: that's when we confused things | |
| 08:40:22 | sean-k-mooney | we did it because operatores and customers wanted a way to move vms between regions/az | |
| 08:40:30 | bauzas | take the SBG and RBX datacenter examples | |
| 08:40:32 | sean-k-mooney | e.g. form dev to prod | |
| 08:40:53 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: when we accepted this, we did put the users under the bus | |
| 08:40:59 | sean-k-mooney | no we dont | |
| 08:41:22 | sean-k-mooney | that woudl only be an issue if and only if we have cinder voluems and dont allow cross az attach | |
| 08:41:34 | sean-k-mooney | in which case it will fail to unshelve | |
| 08:41:38 | bauzas | we change what end users see | |
| 08:41:46 | sean-k-mooney | at there request | |
| 08:42:02 | sean-k-mooney | its ok to change what az they see if they explictly ask you to change that | |
| 08:42:02 | bauzas | and we changed what they originally requested | |
| 08:42:14 | sean-k-mooney | yes because they ask us too | |
| 08:42:28 | sean-k-mooney | for unshelve to host we have 3 options | |
| 08:42:44 | sean-k-mooney | 1 make it an error if the az of the host does not match the current az | |
| 08:43:05 | sean-k-mooney | 2 allow both az an host to be passed and ensure the host is in the az that is pass but allow the az to change | |
| 08:43:36 | sean-k-mooney | 3 accpet az or host mutlally exclusivly and implictly update the az if the host is in a different az | |