| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-09-05 | |||
| 19:03:15 | whoami-rajat | bauzas, hey, we're past client freeze but my API feature is in and just wanted to mention the OSC and novaclient patches required by my feature | |
| 19:03:19 | whoami-rajat | novaclient https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/827163 | |
| 19:03:25 | whoami-rajat | OSC: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/831014 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-09-06 | |||
| 07:05:14 | bauzas | good morning Nova | |
| 09:18:32 | whoami-rajat | hi bauzas | |
| 09:19:31 | whoami-rajat | wanted to reiterate about the client and OSC patches required by my feature | |
| 09:33:45 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: fixup https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/856033 | |
| 09:37:47 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: yup, will look | |
| 09:37:53 | bauzas | and thanks | |
| 09:38:16 | whoami-rajat | thank you :) | |
| 09:38:56 | whoami-rajat | for reference novaclient https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/827163 | |
| 09:38:57 | whoami-rajat | OSC: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/831014 | |
| 10:30:17 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: could you please explain me why you remove the reimage_boot_volume from the kwargs here https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/827163/11/novaclient/v2/servers.py#1750 ? | |
| 10:33:36 | bauzas | because by default, we say Yes for 2.93 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/830883/32/nova/api/openstack/compute/servers.py | |
| 10:48:18 | whoami-rajat | bauzas, yes, so the current design accepted was to add a check on the client side, i will remove the check altogether from novaclient to clear the confusion | |
| 10:49:46 | whoami-rajat | also i just realized we changed the parameter name in current spec to "confirm-reimage", will update that as well | |
| 10:49:56 | sean-k-mooney | whoami-rajat: i just looked at the osc patch and that is not checkign properly | |
| 10:50:15 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: I think we have a bug with the nova patch | |
| 10:50:41 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: well, not a bug but some behavior that's different from the spec | |
| 10:50:45 | sean-k-mooney | the check that was ment to be added to osc was ment to check that if you use the new microversion that you also passed the new paramter if the instance was BFV | |
| 10:50:53 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: how so? | |
| 10:51:04 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: if you use 2.93, you'll opt-in for reimage anyway | |
| 10:51:12 | bauzas | you can't tell no | |
| 10:51:16 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: correct | |
| 10:51:20 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: that is intentional | |
| 10:51:32 | whoami-rajat | sean-k-mooney, ack, will take a look at the osc patch | |
| 10:51:33 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: then the spec was telling other thing | |
| 10:51:44 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: the spec will telling you were able to opt-out | |
| 10:51:46 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: then the spec is wrong | |
| 10:52:06 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: see https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/840155/5/specs/zed/approved/volume-backed-server-rebuild.rst#143 | |
| 10:52:36 | bauzas | we were keeping the original behavior with 2.93 if the user was passing a parameter | |
| 10:52:53 | bauzas | actually, no | |
| 10:53:05 | sean-k-mooney | no that is discribibg the osc change | |
| 10:53:10 | bauzas | the spec was saying that 'reimage is opt-in with 2.93' | |
| 10:53:16 | sean-k-mooney | no | |
| 10:53:22 | sean-k-mooney | that is client side only | |
| 10:53:28 | bauzas | and here we're discussing of "no reimage is opt-out with 2.93' | |
| 10:53:32 | sean-k-mooney | the nova api will not provde a way to opt in or out | |
| 10:53:44 | sean-k-mooney | other then the micorverions | |
| 10:53:45 | bauzas | oh you're right | |
| 10:53:52 | bauzas | "on the client side" | |
| 10:53:55 | sean-k-mooney | yes | |
| 10:54:00 | bauzas | so | |
| 10:54:05 | bauzas | 2.93 makes it default | |
| 10:54:24 | bauzas | and users can say no just by a client parameter | |
| 10:54:35 | sean-k-mooney | no | |
| 10:54:46 | bauzas | then clarify the spec | |
| 10:54:55 | sean-k-mooney | 2.93 makes it unconditional because we wanted rebuild to mean rebuild | |
| 10:55:02 | bauzas | which I understand | |
| 10:55:06 | sean-k-mooney | if you want the old behaivor you use the old microversion | |
| 10:55:14 | bauzas | yes | |
| 10:55:20 | sean-k-mooney | the client check was ment to prevent the request if you did not pass the parmater | |
| 10:55:28 | bauzas | so I don't see a need for an extra param on the client | |
| 10:55:31 | sean-k-mooney | not downgrade the microverios | |
| 10:55:39 | bauzas | ok, then I understand | |
| 10:55:50 | bauzas | you need to say "yes, I understand I'll reimage" | |
| 10:55:55 | sean-k-mooney | exactly | |
| 10:55:57 | whoami-rajat | sean-k-mooney, bauzas , as i see, the novaclient changes are not even needed i guess, just bumping the version to 2.93 should be enough right? | |
| 10:56:14 | sean-k-mooney | whoami-rajat: yep just bumping the max version | |
| 10:56:19 | sean-k-mooney | the rest is not needed | |
| 10:56:24 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: correct | |
| 10:56:27 | whoami-rajat | ack, will update | |
| 10:56:48 | bauzas | well | |
| 10:56:49 | bauzas | sec | |
| 10:57:02 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: we also need a param on the python bindings | |
| 10:57:06 | sean-k-mooney | on the osc change you need to check when the micorversion is 2.93 or higher that --remiage is pased if its a bfv instance | |
| 10:57:10 | bauzas | like, | |
| 10:57:25 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we dont as the python bindigns are not ment to do this check | |
| 10:57:27 | bauzas | "I want explain I know I'll reimage" with my python script | |
| 10:57:33 | sean-k-mooney | nope | |
| 10:57:38 | sean-k-mooney | that is not desireable | |
| 10:57:56 | bauzas | then we need to clarify this paragraph on the spec, this is confusing | |
| 10:58:10 | sean-k-mooney | ack we can do that | |
| 10:58:23 | sean-k-mooney | the python bindings should have the same behavior as the api | |
| 10:58:24 | bauzas | if we only talk about CLI, then agreed on the fact this is purely an OSC check | |
| 10:58:48 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: and agreed on the fact the bindings should just be passthroughs to API calls | |
| 10:58:56 | bauzas | no smartness in therre | |
| 10:58:58 | bauzas | thereù | |
| 10:58:58 | bauzas | thereù | |
| 10:59:00 | bauzas | shit | |
| 10:59:02 | bauzas | there* | |
| 10:59:33 | sean-k-mooney | :) | |
| 10:59:48 | bauzas | whoami-rajat: so, as said, I'd appreciate if you could write a spec follow-up for this param | |
| 10:59:55 | bauzas | so we would agree on it | |
| 11:00:01 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/831014/4/openstackclient/compute/v2/server.py#3236 | |
| 11:00:10 | sean-k-mooney | that what i think we need to do in osc | |
| 11:00:13 | bauzas | as a reminder, some ops are reading our specs to understand the intents | |
| 11:00:40 | sean-k-mooney | i tought it was pretty clear | |
| 11:00:44 | sean-k-mooney | The python-novaclient, python-openstackclient and SDK will be updated | |
| 11:00:46 | sean-k-mooney | to support the new microversion. | |
| 11:01:00 | sean-k-mooney | then sepera sentance | |
| 11:01:02 | sean-k-mooney | n additional parameter ``--confirm-reimage`` will be added as a check | |
| 11:01:04 | sean-k-mooney | (along with the microversion check) on the client side that will determine | |
| 11:01:06 | sean-k-mooney | if the user really wants to opt into the new functionality. | |
| 11:01:12 | sean-k-mooney | i guess we can clarify the second one | |
| 11:01:19 | sean-k-mooney | and say openstack client | |
| 11:01:22 | bauzas | yes, I have problems with the second one | |
| 11:01:43 | bauzas | and yes, we should clarify the difference between the python client bindings and the shell commands | |
| 11:01:45 | sean-k-mooney | and "really wants to opt into" -> "to confime they want to proceed" | |
| 11:01:55 | bauzas | yes | |