Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2024-06-04
16:13:33 erlon I have a request here
16:13:46 erlon for Review priorities
16:14:16 erlon I would like to get some attention on the Shared security groups patches?
16:14:40 bauzas #undo
16:14:40 opendevmeet Removing item from minutes: #topic Stable Branches
16:14:41 erlon s/?/\./g
16:14:56 marlinc I might have put my blueprint in the wrong meeting section, I'm not sure if it is this or open discussion
16:15:06 sean-k-mooney no that at the end
16:15:12 bauzas marlinc: we'll discuss this on the open discussion
16:15:17 sean-k-mooney which is where we should discuss the shared security group patches :)
16:15:29 marlinc Thank you :)
16:15:30 bauzas erlon: for your series, this will be reviewed like any other
16:15:41 erlon ow, came on, thas a review priority topic :)
16:16:01 bauzas https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-dalmatian-status?#L37
16:16:05 bauzas yeah
16:16:16 erlon Right, I just want to make sure that I don't miss any deadlines on that one
16:16:18 sean-k-mooney yes and no its not identifed as a review priortiy form my perspective
16:16:18 bauzas given your blueprint was accepted
16:16:26 sean-k-mooney but ill try and review it after the meeting
16:16:34 sean-k-mooney looks like its passing ci now
16:16:37 erlon And I also have a special request on that
16:16:41 bauzas ditto here, I already have a lot of other series to look at
16:16:55 bauzas moving on then
16:17:01 bauzas #topic Stable Branches
16:17:11 bauzas elodilles: heya
16:17:16 elodilles o/
16:17:24 elodilles #info stable gates should be mostly OK
16:17:40 elodilles (i've seen some intermittent failures, otherwise, nothing special)
16:17:48 elodilles #info stable release proposed for 2024.1 Caracal: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/921287
16:18:07 elodilles we had Bobcat and Antelope stable releases some weeks ago,
16:18:21 elodilles maybe we can release now Caracal as well ^^^
16:18:34 elodilles feel free to comment on the release patch
16:18:45 elodilles #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci
16:18:55 elodilles add any issue if you see one ^^^
16:19:17 elodilles and that's all from me
16:20:25 bauzas thanks
16:20:35 bauzas I'll look at the caracal patch
16:21:04 elodilles bauzas: thx in advance
16:21:09 bauzas +1d fwiw
16:21:22 bauzas #topic vmwareapi 3rd-party CI efforts Highlights
16:21:29 bauzas fwiesel: are you here ?
16:21:38 fwiesel Hi, yes...
16:21:45 fwiesel #info No updates.
16:22:13 fwiesel Still little progress from my side currently. Sorry about that.
16:22:22 fwiesel Any questions or comments?
16:22:41 bauzas not from me
16:22:55 bauzas moving on then
16:23:00 bauzas #topic Open discussion
16:23:11 bauzas erlon: nova handling of virDomainGetJobStats() errors
16:23:27 erlon so, I posted a link on the wiki
16:23:41 erlon https://gist.githubusercontent.com/sombrafam/8f177cbc4e153c328a242811bc24650e/raw/67190ffce7f036c7c3d3628fda15327cef7a41da/nova-compute.log
16:23:45 bauzas (woah, we have 4 topics to discuss today so please discuss everyone by only 5-10 mins maxc)
16:23:54 erlon This bug, is happening every time that we try to do a lot of migrations
16:24:29 bauzas just file a blueprint bug report
16:24:36 erlon For some reason the source host stops responding, and it gets to the time out. I want to know if would be okay to add a new Handler for this kind of exception there:
16:24:36 erlon https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/virt/libvirt/guest.py#L669
16:24:40 bauzas and ping us anytime on the chat
16:24:45 sean-k-mooney erlon: does that imply you you have set the max conncurrent live migration over 1
16:24:51 erlon ah ok, sounds good
16:25:14 erlon I don't know the exact configuration but very likely
16:25:24 sean-k-mooney https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#DEFAULT.max_concurrent_live_migrations
16:25:35 sean-k-mooney that should bassicly never be set to anything excpet 1
16:26:02 erlon So why does that exist? Which case should it apply?
16:26:12 sean-k-mooney there are usecases for it to be != 1 but unless you using 100G networking its not recommended
16:26:16 bauzas it just says it can't connect to the libvirt API
16:26:37 sean-k-mooney it exists for usecases wehere a single core is not enough to saturate the network link
16:26:47 bauzas there could be different reasons why libvirt is resetting the connection
16:27:02 erlon It says that because it time it out due to a short keepalive
16:27:02 sean-k-mooney bauzas:right but since they said this was load related
16:27:22 sean-k-mooney not doning concurrent live migrations may help
16:27:40 bauzas oh, missed that sentence, indeed good point
16:27:50 bauzas don't try to max out the number of calls you make to libvirt
16:28:01 bauzas like any other API, it has limits
16:28:23 erlon This comes from the libvirt logs: "At the same time in libvirtd logs: `May 28 13:00:39 ps5-ra1-n6 libvirtd[612268]: internal error: connection closed due to keepalive timeout`"
16:28:41 erlon So, that's why we know thats a timeout error
16:28:51 bauzas erlon: to answer your original question, no, I wouldn't recommend to modify Nova to handle that libvirt exception
16:29:28 bauzas particularly when the bug comes from libvirt, not nova itself
16:30:04 erlon But see, that function does exactly that. it handles only libvirt exceptions
16:30:31 sean-k-mooney there are some cases where retrying at the nova level is correct
16:30:38 sean-k-mooney this may or may not be one of them
16:30:39 bauzas specific and meaningful libvirt exceptions, that's the point :)
16:30:47 sean-k-mooney can you right this up as a bug report if you have not already
16:31:03 sean-k-mooney and we can see see if this is such a case
16:31:03 bauzas retrying on a generic connection failed is never a good idea
16:31:13 erlon ok, I will as soon as I get a reproducer
16:31:33 sean-k-mooney bauzas: we do that all the time for rest calls
16:31:34 bauzas honestly, you have my opinion
16:31:49 bauzas sean-k-mooney: to placement
16:31:50 sean-k-mooney this is us doing a read call to check the status fo the job
16:31:58 sean-k-mooney bauzas: and neutorn and cinder
16:31:58 erlon I was actually thinking and just returning, an empty info and leave nova call it again in the next periodic task, since this is just a info report
16:32:48 sean-k-mooney perhaps or catching it an logging a warning
16:32:56 sean-k-mooney rather then a trace back
16:33:03 bauzas I wouldn't hide
16:33:11 sean-k-mooney anywya if you have a repoducer we can discuss the solution in gerrit
16:33:12 bauzas if I were catching that exception
16:34:00 erlon The issue with the current process is that, although it triggers the section again, the
16:34:00 erlon periodic tasks do not complete the migration. Consequently, while the VM is migrated
16:34:00 erlon to the destination host, it is not properly cleaned up on the source host.
16:34:03 bauzas honestly, exception giving a better log to the operator saying 'libvirt is getting weirdo, see", I don't see the benefit of adding another handler to a periodic

Earlier   Later