Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2023-01-10
16:44:04 elodilles but that can be done after the meeting
16:44:08 bauzas we're in a good timing
16:44:45 sean-k-mooney elodilles this is your main question right https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867912/5/nova/conf/workarounds.py
16:44:49 elodilles bauzas: yes, if you have time :) otherwise i can also propose them
16:44:57 elodilles sean-k-mooney: yes
16:45:06 sean-k-mooney so i considerd that when reviewing
16:45:25 sean-k-mooney i tought the value of the fix in behaivor outwaied the possibel performance impact
16:45:44 sean-k-mooney but you are correct that fliping the default would maintain the old behaivor
16:46:01 sean-k-mooney fliping the default woudl also result in a workaorunds option being enabeld by default
16:46:07 sean-k-mooney which we generally avoid
16:46:20 sean-k-mooney so not changing the default felt more consitent to me
16:46:41 sean-k-mooney im not sure what other think ^
16:46:47 bauzas hmmm
16:46:52 bauzas loading the context
16:47:20 sean-k-mooney the context is mostly captured in teh help text :)
16:47:21 bauzas so it was a opt-out config
16:47:36 bauzas and when backporting it suddently became opt-in
16:47:44 bauzas right?
16:47:49 sean-k-mooney no we did not change it when back porting
16:47:55 sean-k-mooney elodilles: question is should we
16:48:14 sean-k-mooney so on master we default to the new more desireable beahvior
16:48:15 elodilles no. to put it simple: we change the default behavior on stable branches
16:48:30 sean-k-mooney and elodilles is asking shoudl we keep the old beahivor in the backports
16:48:36 bauzas https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864773/3/nova/conf/workarounds.py default on master is False
16:48:40 bauzas so that's opt-in
16:49:00 bauzas which is the same for the backports
16:49:02 elodilles i mean, given an installed environment, they upgrade, and the behaviour is changed with the upgraded nova
16:49:14 sean-k-mooney elodilles: correct
16:49:18 bauzas elodilles: I don't see a problem here with keeping it opt-in
16:49:41 sean-k-mooney bauzas: well it will required all operator to update there config to adress the bug
16:49:57 elodilles bauzas: it is opt-out :) you have to change the configuration to have the existing behaviour
16:50:10 bauzas sean-k-mooney which is the current behaviour on master, right?
16:50:32 sean-k-mooney on master we now set the reseved value on instnace boot
16:50:51 sean-k-mooney before this patch we set reserved wehn deleteing
16:51:12 bauzas because the option defaults to False, right?
16:51:28 bauzas if you set to True, you keep the original behaviou
16:51:29 sean-k-mooney the workaroudn option is a skip to opt out yes and it default to false
16:51:31 bauzas behaviour
16:51:35 sean-k-mooney correct
16:51:43 bauzas ok
16:51:48 bauzas so, say we backport this
16:51:54 bauzas as it is
16:52:22 bauzas to understand, that means we'll change the behaviour by upgrading to the latest (obviously .y) release
16:52:26 sean-k-mooney as is then the stable branchs get the new behaivor and you need to modify the config to restore the old behaiovr
16:52:44 sean-k-mooney but this is an internal implemation detail that is not part of any public contract
16:52:47 bauzas I think we have semver for communicating the behavioural change
16:52:49 sean-k-mooney so we felt this was better
16:53:29 bauzas can we discuss this out of the meeting ?
16:53:33 bauzas we have 5 mins left
16:53:35 sean-k-mooney sure
16:53:42 bauzas #topic Open discussion
16:53:46 bauzas (bauzas) As a reminder, Summit proposals deadline is today 11:59pm PT
16:53:57 elodilles so if we release now zed, then the operators who uses zed, need to update their configs to have NOT to change how nova works
16:53:59 bauzas you have the very last minute to add your topics
16:54:26 bauzas fwiw, I proposed two forum sessions about nova onboarding and operator meet&greet
16:54:41 bauzas if someone wants to co-host the onboarding forum session, let me know
16:55:19 bauzas gmann: correct me but forum proposal deadline is on april ?
16:55:37 bauzas I'm confused by the fact they added the forum proposals in the tool
16:55:42 gmann bauzas: I hope so. I asked Erin in email but no reply yet. But from form it shows april
16:55:54 bauzas yup, hence my confusion
16:56:31 bauzas I just hope we won't get like Berlin some Forum sessions that very look like Summit sessions with slides and one-sided discussions
16:56:31 kashyap Oh, come on...after all the jobs passed, one "tempest-integrated-compute" job times out :( https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/8b07fa0b71c94fb6abb2b350c5c84c74
16:56:44 bauzas kashyap: on our meeting atm
16:56:45 kashyap Oops, sorry for that random chime in.
16:56:52 kashyap bauzas: Yeah, only realized it just now (sorry)
16:56:56 bauzas np
16:57:00 bauzas (gmann) updates on switching the RBAC(scope and new defaults) defaults in nova
16:57:08 gibi bauzas: if you need a co-host for the onboarding then you can write me up
16:57:09 bauzas you have 3 mins
16:57:36 bauzas gibi: noted. I'm used to do some onboarding and I have ideas but having a co-speaker is somehow better
16:57:44 gibi sure
16:58:07 bauzas looks like gmann is gone and our meeting will end
16:58:14 gmann patch is ready for review #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866218/12
16:58:19 bauzas cool thanks
16:58:40 bauzas gmann: I've seen your ping, I just didn't had time to review it yet
16:58:44 gmann please check and it need placement test fixture change too which is depends-on on nova change #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/869525/3
16:59:05 gmann do not want to delay the switching at the end of cycle
16:59:32 bauzas I've just said review-prio +2
16:59:44 gmann Tempest already run integration job with new RBAC on Nova, glance, neutron and cinder and it is passing finw
16:59:48 gmann thanks
16:59:51 bauzas \o/
17:00:03 opendevreview Pavlo Shchelokovskyy proposed openstack/nova master: Process all nodes when host aggregate changes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869687
17:00:15 bauzas ok, we're on time
17:00:16 bauzas thanks all
17:00:20 bauzas #endmeeting
17:00:20 opendevmeet Meeting ended Tue Jan 10 17:00:20 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
17:00:20 opendevmeet Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-10-16.00.html
17:00:20 opendevmeet Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-10-16.00.txt
17:00:20 opendevmeet Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2023/nova.2023-01-10-16.00.log.html
17:00:22 gibi o/ thanks'
17:00:43 elodilles thanks o/
17:00:58 gmann thanks o/
17:01:18 clarkb re nox it is definitely worth careful consideration and discussion. I like to bring it up ecause I've found many people aren't aware there is an alternative. As far as why I think it is worth considering the main thing is that it is simpler and uses simple building blocks instead of a bunch of custom rewrites of standard tools like build
17:01:30 clarkb when you install things you just run pip basically.
17:01:45 clarkb and you aren't getting custom wheel building like with tox for example
17:02:44 gmann bauzas: dansmith: this is tempest job enabling new rbac and passing fine. I am adding same in nova side too in 866218 https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-enforce-scope-new-defaults&skip=0
17:04:13 sean-k-mooney johnthetubaguy: can you review this ironic hostaggreate change https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/869687
17:04:31 sean-k-mooney bauzas: ^ also good for you to look at
17:04:57 sean-k-mooney bauzas: did we settel on ironic is not supprot for host aggreates a while ago when chatting downstream
17:06:35 bauzas sean-k-mooney: I thought we said given we only support hostnames in aggregates (and not nodenames), I hardly understand how this can work

Earlier   Later