Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2022-06-15
07:27:08 bauzas I remember this
07:27:26 bauzas point is, look at the figures of the meet-and-greet
07:27:36 sean-k-mooney[m] jkulik so i think rescue is now there and rebuild is in flight this cycle
07:27:37 jkulik but it's not just disk=0, it's also that the flavor is explicitly marked for automatic bfv, right?
07:27:56 bauzas probably the one who requested for a bfv flag was hit by the fact he/she was running older than Rocky
07:27:57 jkulik sean-k-mooney: yeah, looking forward to it. we're also trying to jump to xena by this year
07:28:28 bauzas jkulik: that's what I call 'orchestration'
07:28:38 bauzas the 'automatic' side
07:29:28 jkulik ... and no orchestration in Nova itself
07:29:56 sean-k-mooney[m] jkulik for context novas project scope doc declares orchstration as out of scope and we tend to define that as any addtional inter service operation that can be done by a user and the result passed in to nova
07:30:19 jkulik like creating a volume from image, which Nova already does?
07:30:20 sean-k-mooney[m] i.e. create your port/volume ahead of time and tell nova to use it
07:30:23 bauzas https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/project-scope.html#no-more-orchestration
07:30:51 sean-k-mooney[m] jkulik yep so nova only can do that because we need to support that before cinder was split out
07:30:55 bauzas jkulik: you're exactly pointing some orchestration we keep
07:31:13 bauzas because of the API consistency
07:31:23 sean-k-mooney[m] cinder started as nova-volume
07:31:26 jkulik ok, if we keep it, we can still use it, right? I'm mean in the end it's just a flavor using exactly that
07:31:35 sean-k-mooney[m] the same way ironic started as nova-baremetal
07:31:48 sean-k-mooney[m] jkulik we likely will never remove it
07:31:59 sean-k-mooney[m] we would have to raise our min api verion to do so
07:32:06 sean-k-mooney[m] and we wont do that any time soon
07:32:07 sean-k-mooney[m] if ever
07:32:11 bauzas never
07:32:14 jkulik :)
07:32:25 bauzas in particular given the lag we have
07:32:30 sean-k-mooney[m] bauzas well i object to never
07:32:44 bauzas sean-k-mooney: okay, let's be less pragmatic
07:32:50 jkulik so imho, if the user comes in with a BDM of image -> volume, we create the volume. why can't we specify the flavor to default to image -> volume?
07:32:52 bauzas "could be, eventually"
07:32:52 sean-k-mooney[m] as i think its wrong for use to have a min version filed if that is the stance we are taking
07:33:09 sean-k-mooney[m] should be eventurally
07:33:35 bauzas sean-k-mooney: I was there in 2015 when we drafted v2
07:33:42 bauzas v2.1 actually
07:33:58 bauzas we create min_version because we were considering it
07:34:01 bauzas created*
07:34:02 sean-k-mooney[m] yep and at that time we planned to increase it eventually
07:34:25 bauzas but given interop and other reasons, we ended up being less optimistic
07:34:26 sean-k-mooney[m] jkulik what volume_type should be used
07:34:37 sean-k-mooney[m] to create the volume form the image
07:34:49 sean-k-mooney[m] should we delete it on terminate
07:34:52 jkulik that's already a decision Nova has to make
07:34:59 bauzas nope
07:35:17 jkulik then Nova does nothing and it's the default volume type of Cinder
07:35:22 bauzas and I don't want config-driven APIs
07:35:22 sean-k-mooney[m] well we use the default volume type
07:35:31 sean-k-mooney[m] which i gues is your point
07:35:40 bauzas we have defaults for sure
07:35:48 bauzas but that's for a volume
07:35:52 jkulik I mean the feature is already there, I just want a flavor to use it
07:36:27 sean-k-mooney[m] yep it is. we just dont have a way to enable it except via an api parmater today
07:36:39 bauzas for many reasons
07:36:45 jkulik right. so my request would be to enable it via flavor parameter
07:37:11 bauzas again, what's the usecase if we force users to add a volume if they have a diskless flavor ?
07:37:29 sean-k-mooney[m] to not force user to do things
07:37:40 sean-k-mooney[m] and provide bettter ux
07:37:56 bauzas we have the "give me a port" thing
07:38:06 bauzas and this isn't within a flavor, right?
07:38:28 sean-k-mooney[m] do you mean give me an network
07:38:41 sean-k-mooney[m] or —network on server create
07:39:11 sean-k-mooney[m] the differnece with a port is that is never in a flaovr to begin with
07:40:44 bauzas sean-k-mooney: not if you do bandwidth-aware requests :)
07:42:23 sean-k-mooney[m] there is nothing in the falvor for that
07:42:23 gibi I think give me a network is when you say --nic auto
07:42:37 sean-k-mooney[m] the bandwith request comes form the port
07:43:01 gibi yepp bw is a disaggregated resource
07:43:15 jkulik why does the flavor have to be specified diskless btw.? Couldn't we just let the operator specify whether the disk should be on ephemeral or on volume storage i.e. determine the deestination_type of the BDM?
07:43:24 sean-k-mooney[m] no give me a network is the neutron feature that will create a network, subnet and router automaticaly to replicate nova-networks behavior
07:43:35 gibi sean-k-mooney[m]: /o\
07:44:03 bauzas should we ask the same to cinder then ?
07:44:09 sean-k-mooney[m] https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/implemented/get-me-a-network.html
07:44:15 bauzas "give me a volume"
07:44:28 bauzas and nova be --disk auto
07:44:28 sean-k-mooney[m] its called volume create
07:44:38 sean-k-mooney[m] its not the same thing
07:44:59 sean-k-mooney[m] in the neutron case people just wanted the vm to have a port with an ip by defualt
07:45:21 sean-k-mooney[m] but with neutron to do that you ahve to create a networ, subnet and router first
07:45:40 bauzas jkulik: you're right, operators could propose both ephemeral storage and block one
07:46:46 bauzas life would be way easier if we weren't having flavors
07:47:03 sean-k-mooney[m] i was thinking the same
07:47:04 bauzas sean-k-mooney: gibi: this reminds me the Public Cloud SIG session
07:47:19 bauzas sean-k-mooney: gibi: do you know that they stuggle having the same flavor names ?
07:47:23 bauzas struggle
07:47:39 sean-k-mooney[m] disk=0 ram=0 vcpu=0 and just allow —resouce rc=ammount on server create
07:47:49 sean-k-mooney[m] and use unified limits for quota/billing
07:47:54 bauzas proposing a common set of flavors between all Passport operators seemed nearly impossible to achieve
07:48:05 sean-k-mooney[m] ya we should likely not do that
07:48:22 sean-k-mooney[m] the only way to do that is for nova to ship with default flavors
07:48:27 bauzas even that
07:48:27 sean-k-mooney[m] that you can opt into
07:48:36 sean-k-mooney[m] and never update just disable
07:48:39 bauzas they get rid of our default flavors
07:48:49 bauzas OVH has strong concerns about touching their flavors, by instance.
07:48:57 sean-k-mooney[m] we dont ship them the devstack one are not defualt in nova
07:49:28 gibi I have no hard opinion about default flavors. I dont think this is a technical issue, it is an issue of how to create standards
07:49:34 bauzas anyway, I'm just saying we're on a territory I don't like
07:49:52 bauzas gibi: agreed, this isn't a problem we should solve technically
07:50:14 bauzas gibi: we should let the community agree on a standard set, if they agree eventually
07:50:32 sean-k-mooney[m] that or provide supprot for creating them in osc
07:50:38 sean-k-mooney[m] or as a plugin

Earlier   Later