| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-09-10 | |||
| 12:48:12 | sean-k-mooney | i dont recally if '@' is the sentenil for no one or everyoen but we have sental values for both | |
| 12:48:20 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: would somethign like that work for you | |
| 12:49:02 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: one thing that we should not break is bfv with non-zero ephmeral_gb | |
| 12:49:56 | sean-k-mooney | that is often sued to have the root disk run form say ceph while having an addtion ephmeral disk that uses fast local storage, i.e. for ectd or fast local scratch space | |
| 12:50:20 | zigo | "we could add one for BFV with flavors that are not 0" <--- That's what I would like, yes. | |
| 12:51:08 | zigo | Can it be done with an existing deployment already ? | |
| 12:51:09 | sean-k-mooney | gmaan is on pto but i think that woudl be consitent with our exisitng policies | |
| 12:51:47 | sean-k-mooney | yes so the policy rule change woudl jsut prevent you creatin new instnace in that state or resizing to that state | |
| 12:52:02 | sean-k-mooney | so existing workload woudl contiue to work | |
| 12:52:41 | sean-k-mooney | but if folks use heat/tereform ectra to automate deployment then it woudl break there automation | |
| 12:52:42 | zigo | Ok, I'll search how to do it then. | |
| 12:53:03 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. if they refence specifc flavors | |
| 12:53:05 | sean-k-mooney | oh | |
| 12:53:11 | sean-k-mooney | your asking if it cna be done today | |
| 12:53:17 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: sorry no | |
| 12:53:34 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: ill doubel check but i belive we dont have the policy rule today | |
| 12:54:30 | zigo | Ok. | |
| 12:54:39 | sean-k-mooney | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/policies/servers.py#L288-L312 | |
| 12:55:04 | sean-k-mooney | that the existing one we have which does not do what you want but it prevent using an iamge with a 0 disk flavor | |
| 12:55:19 | sean-k-mooney | we need to add the inverse | |
| 12:55:44 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: the related config option is https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#DEFAULT.max_local_block_devices | |
| 12:56:29 | sean-k-mooney | what you could do modify the flavor that have local disk with a forbiden trait | |
| 12:57:03 | sean-k-mooney | then you could set DEFAULT.max_local_block_devices=0 on a subset of hosts adn use provider.yaml or the api to add a trait to those hosts | |
| 12:57:19 | sean-k-mooney | you could also do thie with the aggrate flavor extra specs filter | |
| 12:57:42 | sean-k-mooney | that woudl turn the combinaiton yuou want to block into a no valid host | |
| 12:57:56 | sean-k-mooney | honelsy however that is not a good solution for an existing cloud | |
| 12:58:15 | sean-k-mooney | that really intended fo diskless blade servers | |
| 12:58:29 | zigo | Thanks a lot, that's helpful. | |
| 12:58:40 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: there is one other non nova thing you coudl consider | |
| 12:58:54 | sean-k-mooney | currently i guess your doing flavor based billing | |
| 12:59:09 | sean-k-mooney | actully it might now work | |
| 12:59:25 | sean-k-mooney | i was going ot say you could look at the allocation in palcemetn, | |
| 12:59:27 | zigo | Yes we are doing flavor based billing. | |
| 12:59:41 | zigo | And today, a customer complained he was billed for a system disk he's not able to use. | |
| 13:00:02 | sean-k-mooney | i belive ofr BFV guest the allcoation for the instnace will not have disk as part of it for BFV guests | |
| 13:00:16 | zigo | It's his fault, but for a definitive fix, we should just forbid doing that. | |
| 13:01:02 | sean-k-mooney | well that debatable nova supprot this but yes you need to acount for that in the billing system as a result | |
| 13:02:48 | sean-k-mooney | anyway nova zeros out the root disk storage form the flavor for bfv guest in palcement so if you wanted too you shoudl be able ot sue that to bill more acurratly until a new policy rule is intorduced | |
| 13:03:20 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: would you mind crating a blueprint for this or adding a ptg topic so we have somethign to dicuss and track this request | |
| 13:04:13 | sean-k-mooney | i dont know if other woudl want a small spec for this but we can dicuss that in the irc meeting once we have a blueprint. | |
| 13:28:01 | zigo | sean-k-mooney: Will do, thanks for your input ! | |
| 14:36:23 | dansmith | gibi: so on the the s-g parallelize thing.. in fixing the last few tests, I think I've realized that the accounting for the "batches" test(s) was so off because of the sequential processing | |
| 14:36:36 | dansmith | sort of a "yeah, duh" moment | |
| 14:38:55 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Fix bug 2114951 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952895 | |
| 14:48:06 | gibi | dansmith: :) | |
| 14:50:33 | dansmith | the downside is that the behavior becomes a little less deterministic (as expected) so I'm having to change assertions a bit | |
| 15:29:30 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: so lookign at https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/release-management.html#milestone-3-feature-freeze the requirements freeze starts at m3 and is unfozent on master after the stable branch of the requirement repos created at https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/release-management.html#release-2 | |
| 15:31:22 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: so taht woudl imply its too late to rolback pyroute2 however i have no idea regarding your other question fo can this happen on stable/2025.2, my gut feeling is no becuase it could break released packages based on rc1 or the ga release, or at the very least cause the pyroute2 package to need a downgrade | |
| 15:32:11 | sean-k-mooney | with that said im not sure so thanks for sending that email again | |
| 16:14:09 | gibi | yeah I feel we need to roll forward once we have a pyroute2 fix both on master and stable/2025.2 I hope rolling forward will be OK on stable | |
| 16:32:56 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Drop GLANCE_STANDALONE https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960404 | |
| 17:00:33 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: my understanding is we are not allowed to raise minversion but we can increase max | |
| 17:01:04 | sean-k-mooney | so it shoudl be ok as long as theyre is no breaking change | |
| 17:01:41 | sean-k-mooney | its not something i have seen us do often however so im not very familar with the critia that is applied | |
| 18:30:20 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2025.1: hypervisors: Optimize uptime retrieval for better performance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960409 | |
| 18:34:11 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: hypervisors: Optimize uptime retrieval for better performance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960410 | |
| 18:35:00 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.1: hypervisors: Optimize uptime retrieval for better performance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960411 | |
| 21:12:24 | opendevreview | Cyril Roelandt proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Drop GLANCE_STANDALONE https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960404 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2025-09-11 | |||
| 09:03:17 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Add Flamingo prelude section https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/959188 | |
| 09:32:32 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: DNM: Test patch removing glance standalone https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960446 | |
| 12:32:38 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2025.2: Update .gitreview for stable/2025.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/960507 | |
| 12:32:40 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement stable/2025.2: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/2025.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/960508 | |
| 12:32:41 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/placement master: Update master for stable/2025.2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/960509 | |
| 12:34:15 | opendevreview | Thomas Goirand proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Restrict booting from volume with disk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/960513 | |
| 12:34:38 | zigo | sean-k-mooney: It's the first time I'm writing a spec, I hope it's ok... | |
| 13:09:42 | jlejeune | sean-k-mooney: gibi: Hello, I recently resumed my work on bug #2044235. You asked me to create a regression test to confirm the bug, but I'm having trouble reproducing it. When I raise the messagingTimeout exception from the ‘check_can_live_migrate_source’ method, it seems like this exception is caught by the fake transport driver, causing my test to fail. When I try with any other exception, | |
| 13:09:48 | jlejeune | my test works fine. Have you ever seen this behavior before? | |
| 13:11:50 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: you removed section instead of jsut say None so that is why pep8 is failing | |
| 13:12:08 | zigo | Ok, will re-add it. | |
| 13:12:43 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: ill take a look later but thansk for creating one. we can discuss in the spec what the default for the policy shoudl be | |
| 13:12:58 | sean-k-mooney | my guess is member but we may decied to change it in the cycle after to admin | |
| 13:15:16 | sean-k-mooney | zigo: the approch we normally take is add a new policy maintianing the same beahvior then update it after, however that in sope to dicuss in the spec | |
| 13:15:31 | sean-k-mooney | basiclly do we have an upgrade impact or not | |
| 13:16:00 | opendevreview | Thomas Goirand proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Restrict booting from volume with disk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/960513 | |
| 13:16:11 | sean-k-mooney | my expection is if we changed it to admin it would break tempest tests as we dont use speical falvors with 0 disk to test BFV in general | |
| 13:16:32 | sean-k-mooney | or at least i dont think we do that exclusively | |
| 14:14:33 | opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2044235 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960349 | |
| 14:31:36 | sean-k-mooney | jlejeune: sorry i am in a few converstaion at once. i see you pushed the tst so i can try and reveiw that patch and play with it loccally | |
| 14:33:00 | jlejeune | sean-k-mooney: no worry, I saw that you're in discussion with zigo | |
| 14:33:26 | sean-k-mooney | and on slack and oslo and watcher channel | |
| 14:33:42 | jlejeune | :) | |
| 14:34:09 | jlejeune | you're such a busy man :) | |
| 14:34:33 | sean-k-mooney | that or i have the attention span fo a magpie | |
| 14:35:26 | jlejeune | ^^ | |
| 14:35:46 | sean-k-mooney | so to your question atbout messagingTimeout it might be because of how we mock our messaage bus using the olso in memory oslo.messaging driver | |
| 14:35:58 | jlejeune | exactly | |
| 14:36:33 | sean-k-mooney | we sometimes need to disable case as call to get this to work as well | |
| 14:37:11 | jlejeune | I didn't find any example of that, do you have some in mind ? | |
| 14:37:54 | sean-k-mooney | no but i think we have or had example of causing live migration to fail in other tests | |
| 14:38:53 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure if your familar with the CAST_AS_CALL fixture as the name suggest it turn rpc casts which are fire and forget into a sync call that run in place and returns only when its complete | |
| 14:39:10 | sean-k-mooney | i dont think that is the problem here | |
| 14:39:31 | sean-k-mooney | but it can cause slightly diffent rpc behavior in teh regress test and sometime we have to turn it off | |
| 14:40:32 | jlejeune | yes I saw that flag and I tried to turn it off, but without any success | |
| 14:52:00 | sean-k-mooney | so we do have some regression tests for live migration roolback https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/759e03c35d91dac4a04237d58493665c01952c9f/nova/tests/functional/regressions/test_bug_1848343.py#L105 | |
| 14:53:35 | opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2044235 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960349 | |
| 14:55:44 | sean-k-mooney | im wonderign if there is a bette way to similate the failrue | |
| 14:58:03 | sean-k-mooney | ah you now just raising a generic excption | |
| 15:01:19 | jlejeune | yes because I can't raise the MessagingTimeout exception, if I do so, it's caught by the secheduler when it tries to find a destination host | |
| 15:02:54 | jlejeune | but after thinking about the issue, for my point of view, it's not very a big deal to catch all exceptions coming from that rpc call during the pre live migration check, what do you think about it ? | |
| 15:09:43 | opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2044235 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/960349 | |