| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-07-26 | |||
| 17:41:52 | sean-k-mooney | sure and by config option doc you mean flavor validator doc | |
| 17:41:52 | dansmith | compute_ would work too I guess, but I think it's less clear | |
| 17:42:28 | sean-k-mooney | ack ya nova_ i liek more but i would be happy with compute_ | |
| 17:42:40 | sean-k-mooney | so either i think are ok | |
| 17:42:53 | dansmith | nova_ and promise to never ever discuss this again? :) | |
| 17:43:16 | bauzas | or say it 5 times in front of a mirror ? | |
| 17:43:24 | sean-k-mooney | :) | |
| 17:43:38 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: are you ok with that? | |
| 17:45:06 | melwitt | I guess. I'm focused on making sure everyone's happy with the name. I checked https://docs.openstack.org/glance/latest/admin/useful-image-properties.html and don't find any other project names there so that feels a bit weird, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ | |
| 17:45:45 | bauzas | virt_disk_encryption ? | |
| 17:45:57 | dansmith | intrinsic_disk_encryption, managed_disk_encryption | |
| 17:46:00 | bauzas | damn, I stepped into the ... | |
| 17:46:15 | dansmith | virt_ is not specific enough I think, because cinder disks aren't real disks | |
| 17:46:30 | dansmith | non_volume_disk_encryption.. uglier, but no project name and more accurate | |
| 17:46:42 | dansmith | OR | |
| 17:46:52 | bauzas | oh, I was poorly refering to the fact we defer the disk creation to the underlying virt driver | |
| 17:46:55 | dansmith | we explain that "ephemeral disks" are "everything but volume disks" and then we're back to the start! | |
| 17:47:08 | melwitt | 😂 ahhhhhh | |
| 17:47:29 | sean-k-mooney | ya i still fine ephmeral kind of insulting to refer to novas storage but thats just me | |
| 17:47:30 | bauzas | (18:57:19) bauzas: yeah, if we need to write some doc explaining "ephemeral" == "this new thing" this is bad | |
| 17:47:30 | bauzas | (18:56:47) bauzas: if we pick something else, this has to be better understandable about what it is | |
| 17:47:30 | bauzas | (18:57:39) bauzas: hence the challenge | |
| 17:48:19 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: you're fine or you "find" ? | |
| 17:48:35 | bauzas | cores, would appreciate a quick +2 on os-vif blocking https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850998/2 | |
| 17:48:35 | sean-k-mooney | we have had customer go to great lents to do terible things because they found the term ephemeral unackceptable | |
| 17:48:44 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i find | |
| 17:48:54 | bauzas | or because they considered hostnames be FQDNs ? | |
| 17:49:03 | bauzas | sorry, this was easy | |
| 17:49:11 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we should not need that anymore | |
| 17:49:14 | dansmith | personally I think ephemeral is a pretty accurate name | |
| 17:49:17 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: its blocked in upperconstraits | |
| 17:49:28 | dansmith | if they're local disks on compute nodes, then ephemeral means "they could go away if a single computer dies" | |
| 17:49:43 | sean-k-mooney | yep and so could cinder volumes | |
| 17:49:48 | dansmith | and even when they're on ceph, they're treated not nearly as precious as data volumes | |
| 17:49:49 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: most of them dont provide ha | |
| 17:49:59 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: we're pulling u-c on all jobs ? | |
| 17:50:04 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: but the intent behind a volume is long-term storage generally | |
| 17:50:10 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we shoudl be | |
| 17:50:12 | bauzas | I thought this was only on tox targets | |
| 17:50:19 | bauzas | and not tempest | |
| 17:50:21 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: it would be a bug if we were not | |
| 17:50:26 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: what's the customer did something bad bc they didn't like the term? | |
| 17:50:50 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: hacking: force explicit import of python's mock https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/708768 | |
| 17:51:10 | sean-k-mooney | well i wont mention there name but they instead on doing pci passthough fo a raid controler intor ther vm because they did not accept novas ephmeral storage as accpetable | |
| 17:51:10 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I'll propose a new rev for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/838976, we'll see | |
| 17:52:23 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: but that's just because either they didn't read docs, understand, or our docs suck | |
| 17:53:08 | dansmith | and if they're making decisions based on their perception of one word without knowing what it means in context, then they probably have many other problems | |
| 17:53:22 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: yes they messed up the server toplogy and didnt realise we did not supprot block deivce passethough other then via cinder | |
| 17:53:23 | dansmith | like thinking cinder volumes are actually burnt ashes of former disks | |
| 17:53:35 | dansmith | and nova computes explode to make new space clouds | |
| 17:55:09 | melwitt | lol @ burnt former disks | |
| 17:56:39 | sean-k-mooney | i think im to the point where i dont care anymore | |
| 17:57:59 | dansmith | well, jokes aside, I think we probably have to just pick something that won't be perfect and move on | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-07-27 | |||
| 06:10:53 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: imagebackend: Add support to libvirt_info for LUKS based encryption https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826755 | |
| 06:49:43 | gibi | o/ | |
| 07:00:28 | opendevreview | Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Create specs directory for 2023.1 Antelope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/851007 | |
| 07:25:58 | bauzas | \o | |
| 07:42:39 | gibi | bauzas: I left feedback in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/838976 | |
| 08:11:05 | bauzas | gibi: will look soon | |
| 09:02:12 | opendevreview | wangkuntian proposed openstack/nova master: Modify the url of openstack client commands. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851197 | |
| 09:39:52 | gibi | stephenfin, sean-k-mooney: we have valid py310 failures in the mock switch patch | |
| 09:41:12 | gibi | we can debate that py310 is non voting, so we can merge regardless but as the failure is valid we just pushing the problem to our future slef | |
| 09:41:15 | gibi | self | |
| 09:42:25 | kashyap | gibi: Morning, can you give this another go? - I've addressed your concerns: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851034 | |
| 09:42:37 | gibi | sure | |
| 09:43:51 | gibi | done +2 | |
| 09:43:56 | gibi | thanks for the releasenotes | |
| 09:44:13 | kashyap | gibi: Thank you! Now to figure out the backports | |
| 09:44:41 | gibi | I expect it to be painless as you have a well contained change | |
| 09:48:56 | kashyap | Yeah, checking | |
| 09:49:21 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney: or bauzas - Can you put it through, pls - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851034 | |
| 09:49:55 | bauzas | ack | |
| 09:51:40 | kashyap | bauzas: Just for info: the above code was functionally (in a real env) tested by Red Hat support folks | |
| 09:54:39 | kashyap | gibi: Heh, Yoga backport itself has conflicts :D /me goes to look | |
| 09:54:51 | kashyap | It's simple, though | |
| 09:58:23 | opendevreview | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova stable/yoga: Add a workaround to skip hypervisor version check on LM https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851202 | |
| 10:00:27 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: Remove the PowerVM driver https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850346 | |
| 10:09:38 | bauzas | kashyap: -1 just for the relnote https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851034 | |
| 10:10:05 | bauzas | I could accept this change, but I'd change the note to use 'feature' and not 'upgrade' | |
| 10:10:48 | bauzas | so given we're not close to the deadline, that's why I'm asking just for this nit | |
| 10:11:21 | bauzas | at least for operators looking at our releasenotes | |
| 10:11:51 | kashyap | bauzas: FWIW, I've actually seen other rel-notes for such things and chose the 'upgrade' thing | |
| 10:11:54 | kashyap | bauzas: As this is mostly useful during that scenario | |
| 10:12:39 | sean-k-mooney[m] | both points are valid | |
| 10:12:53 | opendevreview | Kashyap Chamarthy proposed openstack/nova stable/xena: Add a workaround to skip hypervisor version check on LM https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851205 | |
| 10:12:59 | bauzas | kashyap: https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/releasenotes.html?highlight=reno#when-a-release-note-is-needed | |
| 10:13:00 | sean-k-mooney[m] | it is a new feature but its also a workaround that is only usefule for upgrades and limited other cases | |
| 10:13:17 | kashyap | sean-k-mooney[m]: bauzas: I could use "other" flag, then | |
| 10:13:37 | bauzas | kashyap: honestly, my thought is just about operators looking at our notes | |
| 10:13:40 | bauzas | I know some of them | |
| 10:13:50 | kashyap | bauzas: Yeah, I get that | |
| 10:13:52 | bauzas | in general, they look at two sections | |
| 10:13:54 | kashyap | bauzas: How about "other", then? | |
| 10:14:06 | bauzas | kashyap: if you want | |
| 10:14:18 | bauzas | my only concern was about the 'upgrade' section | |
| 10:14:24 | kashyap | bauzas: Just vote - you and Sean :) | |
| 10:14:33 | bauzas | as I was saying, operators look at two sections | |
| 10:14:34 | kashyap | "feature" or "other" | |
| 10:14:48 | kashyap | I'll respin right away (inncluding the backports) | |
| 10:15:18 | bauzas | they look at the prelude section (for knowing what we have) and at the upgrade section (to know what they need to verify) | |