| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-11-13 | |||
| 20:50:26 | sean-k-mooney | is it set to the correct value there? | |
| 20:50:50 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Amend ShareMappingStatus due to asynchronous call https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/908864 | |
| 20:50:51 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Amend DB model add a unique constraint. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/912518 | |
| 20:50:51 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Attach Manila shares via virtiofs (manila abstraction) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/831194 | |
| 20:50:52 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Use client token when talking to manila https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/925277 | |
| 20:50:52 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Attach Manila shares via virtiofs (drivers and compute manager part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/833090 | |
| 20:50:53 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Mounting the shares as part of the initialization process https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/880075 | |
| 20:50:53 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Deletion of associated share mappings on instance deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/881472 | |
| 20:50:54 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add metadata for shares https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850500 | |
| 20:50:54 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add share_info parameter to reboot method for each driver (driver part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854823 | |
| 20:50:56 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support rebooting an instance with shares (compute manager part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854824 | |
| 20:50:56 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add share_info parameter to resume method for each driver (driver part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860284 | |
| 20:50:58 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support resuming an instance with shares (compute manager part) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860285 | |
| 20:50:58 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add helper methods to rescue/unrescue shares https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860286 | |
| 20:51:00 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Support rescuing an instance with shares https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860287 | |
| 20:51:00 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Allow to mount manila share using Cephfs protocol https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/883862 | |
| 20:51:02 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Check shares support (compute manager) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885751 | |
| 20:51:02 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Attach Manila shares via virtiofs (API) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/836830 | |
| 20:51:04 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add helper methods to attach/detach shares https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/885753 | |
| 20:51:04 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_attach notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850501 | |
| 20:51:06 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_detach notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851028 | |
| 20:51:06 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add shares to InstancePayload https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851029 | |
| 20:51:08 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_attach_error notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860282 | |
| 20:51:08 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add instance.share_detach_error notification https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/860283 | |
| 20:51:10 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Reports instance events to the DB regarding attaching and detaching a share https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/927088 | |
| 20:51:10 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add libvirt test to ensure metadata are working. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852086 | |
| 20:51:12 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Add virt/libvirt error test cases https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852087 | |
| 20:51:12 | opendevreview | ribaudr proposed openstack/nova master: Manila shares admin guide documentation https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/871642 | |
| 20:51:54 | sean-k-mooney | s3rj1k: its defiend as a HostDomainOpt type shich shoudl accpaate any ip, hostanem or fqdn | |
| 20:51:56 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/conf/libvirt.py#L239-L254 | |
| 20:52:40 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/oslo.config/blob/82552116f827030ce1e493506fe83ef71656e447/oslo_config/cfg.py#L1189 | |
| 20:54:34 | s3rj1k | sean-k-mooney: yea, I see value in logs DEBUG nova.api.openstack.wsgi_app [-] libvirt.live_migration_inbound_addr = 10.42.71.101 {{(pid=205504)... | |
| 20:55:13 | sean-k-mooney | wait where are you definign the values ? | |
| 20:55:25 | sean-k-mooney | your putting them on the compute nodes nova.conf right | |
| 20:55:40 | sean-k-mooney | for devstack this is called /etc/nova/nova-cpu.conf | |
| 20:56:09 | s3rj1k | was putting it in nova.conf :( | |
| 20:56:18 | s3rj1k | lemme check again | |
| 20:58:39 | s3rj1k | ::facepalm | |
| 20:59:01 | s3rj1k | well, in works | |
| 20:59:14 | sean-k-mooney | with the revert rightt | |
| 20:59:27 | s3rj1k | sean-k-mooney: sorry for that, yea, with revert | |
| 20:59:39 | sean-k-mooney | so it woudl b einteresting if it fails if you drop the revert | |
| 20:59:52 | sean-k-mooney | cause if so then that is the probelm and the fix | |
| 21:00:24 | s3rj1k | hmm, lemme check | |
| 21:01:14 | sean-k-mooney | no rush can you update the bug wiht your finding either way | |
| 21:03:31 | sean-k-mooney | the revert is good to do anyway but i think im going to finish for today | |
| 21:06:31 | s3rj1k | sean-k-mooney: yep, fails without revert | |
| 21:06:52 | s3rj1k | i'll update bugreport | |
| 21:10:53 | s3rj1k | done https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2086867/comments/5 | |
| 21:11:03 | s3rj1k | thanks Sean! | |
| 21:12:50 | sean-k-mooney | cool then lets proceed with the revert we can follow up with others to review tomrorow | |
| 21:13:21 | s3rj1k | I'll also will revalidate that after merge on clean DevStack, just in case :) | |
| 21:13:58 | sean-k-mooney | we may want to consider twakign ci to be able to test this but i think that is best left to a followup | |
| #openstack-nova - 2024-11-14 | |||
| 05:38:26 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: nova-manage: Add flavor scanning to migrate_to_unified_limits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924110 | |
| 05:38:27 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: Add [quota]unified_limits_required_resources list https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/924025 | |
| 08:23:09 | bauzas | happy spec review day, folks | |
| 08:29:53 | opendevreview | Max proposed openstack/nova master: fix: leftover BDM after instance delete https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934984 | |
| 09:41:13 | opendevreview | Max proposed openstack/nova master: fix: leftover volume_attachment on instance delete https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/934984 | |
| 10:43:24 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/nova master: reno: Update master for unmaintained/2023.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/935117 | |
| 10:43:53 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/os-vif master: reno: Update master for unmaintained/2023.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/935119 | |
| 10:44:33 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/osc-placement master: reno: Update master for unmaintained/2023.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-placement/+/935121 | |
| 10:45:02 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement master: reno: Update master for unmaintained/2023.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/935123 | |
| 10:45:32 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: reno: Update master for unmaintained/2023.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/935125 | |
| 15:43:07 | simondodsley | How often are new Nova bugs looked at? I have a customer who raised a bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2080531) on 09/12 and it hasn't been triagged by the looks of it. | |
| 15:55:05 | artom | Left a question about the need for a new microversion on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/873901 - is gmann still our microversion guru? | |
| 15:57:21 | gibi | artom: is this transforming an unhandled exception to a handled exception on the API, if so then it does not need a microversion | |
| 15:57:50 | gibi | the addition of the possible new return code 409 is more gray area to me | |
| 15:58:22 | artom | gibi, yeah, that latter point is a gray area for me too. | |
| 15:58:45 | artom | And it's the crux of my question. | |
| 15:59:31 | gibi | According to the OpenStack API Working Group, a 500 Internal Server Error should NOT be returned to the user for failures due to user error that can be fixed by changing the request on the client side. This kind of a fix doesn’t require a change to the microversion. | |
| 15:59:36 | gibi | https://docs.openstack.org/senlin/ocata/developer/api_microversion.html | |
| 16:00:38 | gibi | so if it was a 500 then I would say according to the diagram we don't need a new microversion. | |
| 16:00:59 | gibi | but if we want to be safe then we can change the patch to return 400 instead of 409 and then it is not a new status code either | |
| 17:28:47 | artom | Yeah, I'm just not sure how to treat the fact that clients out there might not be equipped to deal with a 409 for that particular API | |
| 17:48:44 | gibi | then lets switch it to 400. 400 is generic so it is not a problem to return it, we just cannot return the most specific code we want | |
| 17:51:07 | melwitt | I'm not sure if we have to stick to only the 400's that are currently there. gmann can you remind me are we allowed to add say 409 to an API that already has 400 and 403 without a microversion? ^ | |
| 17:51:47 | sean-k-mooney | i think this is in the microvertion doc we can go to 403 | |
| 17:51:59 | sean-k-mooney | and we can go to any exsitng code use by that api | |
| 17:52:12 | sean-k-mooney | so if 409 is used for soemthign elce for that action then we can extend that | |
| 17:52:13 | melwitt | ok, so it has to be an existing code. I didn't remember that | |
| 17:52:34 | sean-k-mooney | well that im not sure of but i know we are allwoed to go form 500 to an existing code | |
| 17:52:44 | sean-k-mooney | and 401 and 403 are alwasy allowed in addtion to 400 | |
| 17:52:52 | sean-k-mooney | 409 i not sure | |
| 17:53:11 | melwitt | ack | |
| 17:53:23 | sean-k-mooney | i alwasy have to look that last point up | |
| 17:53:38 | sean-k-mooney | https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/microversions.html | |
| 17:54:09 | sean-k-mooney | he exception to not needing a microversion when returning a previously unspecified error code is the 400, 403, 404 and 415 cases. | |
| 17:55:54 | sean-k-mooney | 400 is more correct anyway as its not a issue with the stae of things | |
| 17:56:18 | sean-k-mooney | its an issue wth the contet of the request | |
| 17:56:36 | sean-k-mooney | although i can see an argument for 409 on other grounds | |
| 17:56:59 | sean-k-mooney | i personlay argued for 409 before | |
| 17:57:23 | sean-k-mooney | but i didnt think we shoudl backport this then | |
| 17:58:00 | sean-k-mooney | if i recall when i reviewd this in the past i argued that it shold be a case sensieive check | |
| 17:59:16 | sean-k-mooney | we went back and forth on that bug a few times | |
| 19:10:09 | sean-k-mooney | by the way since its a spec review day https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/934391 it would be nice to move forward with the unified limits spec | |
| 19:23:05 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: ^ is that something you have time to look at today | |
| 20:19:09 | mikal | In terms of spec reviews, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/932387 should be relatively trivial too given it has a +2 and is largely unchanged from last time. | |
| 20:43:11 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/os-vif master: reno: Update master for unmaintained/2023.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-vif/+/935119 | |
| 22:52:07 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Clean up the remaining logic for Windows OS Support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/932407 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2024-11-15 | |||
| 00:51:06 | gmann | melwitt: sean-k-mooney artom gibi, if we return 409 then it need microversion. Only way to avoid microversion is if we are returning existing error code (400, 403, 404 and 415 are always return from all APIs). I think returning 400 here as gibi mentioned is good candidate. | |