Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2025-10-08
11:21:03 jlejeune sean-k-mooney: exactly, thanks for your votes
11:21:29 jlejeune I'm going to push my new regression test when that first change will be merged
11:35:31 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Update start_service() function in test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963156
11:45:41 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2085135 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963368
11:48:27 jlejeune bauzas: sean-k-mooney: here it is ^
11:53:45 sean-k-mooney can you rebase the fix change on top of the repoducer. regression test shoudl idealy be in the regression folder in a file named test_bug_#######.py
11:59:47 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
12:00:40 jlejeune done for the rebase
12:02:52 sean-k-mooney that does not seem to be rebased on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963368
12:03:13 sean-k-mooney so i was expectign to see that with the rebase it would fial in ci
12:03:40 sean-k-mooney until you later update it to modify the regression test to nolonger assert that the excption is raised
12:07:37 jlejeune for me it made more sense to put it in test_host_mapping module but I can move it in a dedicated module if you insist
12:09:29 gibi bauzas: can you look back to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947260 I promise it is very simple
12:10:25 bauzas gibi: thanks for the reminder
12:10:26 bauzas did it
12:12:48 gibi thanks
12:19:08 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2085135 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963368
12:20:27 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2085135 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963368
12:25:07 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
12:29:14 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
12:29:18 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Prune a_c search space by invalid prefixes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/962776
12:29:18 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Inline _consolidate_allocation_requests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963052
12:29:19 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Release notes for bug/2126751 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963275
12:52:25 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Prune a_c search space by invalid prefixes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/962776
12:52:25 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Inline _consolidate_allocation_requests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963052
12:52:26 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Release notes for bug/2126751 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963275
12:55:11 gibi dansmith: I fixed the comments and replied to you questions
12:56:52 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Release notes for bug/2126751 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963275
13:03:58 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement stable/2025.2: Remove excessive logging from GET a_c https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963382
13:04:38 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement stable/2025.1: Remove excessive logging from GET a_c https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963383
13:05:07 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement stable/2024.2: Remove excessive logging from GET a_c https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963384
13:26:48 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Prune a_c search space by invalid prefixes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/962776
13:26:49 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Inline _consolidate_allocation_requests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963052
13:26:49 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Release notes for bug/2126751 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963275
13:41:54 dansmith gibi: replied
13:52:10 bauzas dansmith: not sure you saw it, but I eventually found the solution so please review that series : https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bug/2125935%22
13:53:06 bauzas btw. I lol'd when I saw BTTF2 and BTTF1 (the best movies <3)
13:53:21 bauzas s/BTTF2/BTTF3
13:56:08 dansmith there is more BTTF trivia sprinkled (by me) through our tests, FYI... but yep, will look in a bit
13:59:54 bauzas thanks
14:10:06 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Prune a_c search space by invalid prefixes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/962776
14:10:07 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Inline _consolidate_allocation_requests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963052
14:10:07 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Release notes for bug/2126751 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/963275
14:10:38 gibi dansmith: thanks. I think everything is fixed now ^^
14:25:24 dansmith gibi: just one more nit.. just ooooooone more
14:25:29 dansmith (not really)
14:26:34 gibi :)
14:26:38 gibi thanks
14:28:06 dansmith gibi: so the inlining patch.. is that really a big benefit?
14:29:43 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova master: Remove nova.service.process_launcher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947260
14:30:16 gibi yep it can half runtime or bigger configs like for for a compute with 21 devs and a flavor with 21 devs requested
14:30:22 gibi s/or/for/
14:30:36 dansmith but why? just overhead for the function call?
14:30:51 dansmith (few minutes late to the eventlet call, fyi)
14:31:16 gibi it is not just inlining the call it is avoiding recalculation of things by re-using intermediate data and relying on the fact that the logic behind the call is cumulative
14:33:30 dansmith okay, would we get most of the benefit by just making a better function instead of having to inline? I haven't looked at it in detail yet, so..
15:16:58 sean-k-mooney gibi: dansmith i belive this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/679385 was related to that work but its not the optimistation i was refering too
15:18:42 gibi sean-k-mooney: https://blog.leafe.com/graph-database-follow-up/ this describes one of the experiment
15:20:11 sean-k-mooney oh it was tetsuro that was workign on this
15:20:41 sean-k-mooney ya i remeber taliksing about graphql as well i belvie this was all arount th time of the second vancouver summit
15:23:57 gibi I remember the room where Ed showed his trials but I cannot associate a city to the room :)
15:28:44 sean-k-mooney it may have been the second denver one also
15:28:53 sean-k-mooney it was one of the last in person ones
15:32:06 sean-k-mooney but ya the preor post had some imperssin ve early showing https://blog.leafe.com/placement-graph-examples/ honestly whyile i do think adopting a graph based db on teh backend might ultimpalty make sense. moving an existing cloud and supproting the full api of placemetn with its special cases liek memerof ectra woudl be non trivail to do
15:33:23 sean-k-mooney neo4j is perhapse even more popular today the it was back then with the riase of llms and rag
15:33:33 sean-k-mooney but java is less so
16:15:01 opendevreview Merged openstack/os-resource-classes master: Drop basepython https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-resource-classes/+/962806
17:11:12 opendevreview Merged openstack/placement master: Remove remaining basepython https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/962804
19:17:04 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Add ResourceProviderWeigher for capacity-aware scheduling https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953131
20:25:32 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Add ResourceProviderWeigher for capacity-aware scheduling https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953131
23:12:04 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Add ResourceProviderWeigher for capacity-aware scheduling https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953131
23:21:44 opendevreview sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Add ResourceProviderWeigher for capacity-aware scheduling https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953131
#openstack-nova - 2025-10-09
07:01:07 jlejeune sean-k-mooney: hello, is that better: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963368 ?
07:46:39 elodilles hi nova-stable-maint members o/ i've sent a mail to ML yesterday about 2024.1 Caracal transition to Unmaintained in 2 weeks (!), we could probably do a final stable release of 2024.1 Caracal, but we should be quick about it (but be careful not to break anything! as this will be final!)
07:47:03 elodilles but before we cut a release, maybe a couple of backports can land, see the etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-caracal-eom
07:49:11 bauzas ack will review those
07:55:38 jlejeune elodilles: bauzas: it could be great also to backport that topic: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bug/2085135%22 :)
08:22:04 elodilles jlejeune: once they got merged to master branch and backports are proposed, then feel free to ping me / add me as reviewer to those backports :)
08:27:43 jlejeune elodilles: got it, thanks
09:41:23 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
10:48:55 opendevreview Svein-Erik Skjelbred proposed openstack/nova stable/2025.1: lvcreate fails now and then. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963513
11:15:29 sean-k-mooney jlejeune: yep thanks
11:16:18 sean-k-mooney jlejeune: that is now followign or standar repoeducer and fix pattern using a dedicated regression test in the regression folder
11:35:42 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
12:31:50 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2085135 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963368
12:31:50 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
12:58:24 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Adds regression test for bug LP#2085135 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963368
12:58:25 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
13:18:46 opendevreview Julien Le Jeune proposed openstack/nova master: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022
13:21:12 jlejeune sean-k-mooney: I've updated my changes following your reviews
13:23:15 sean-k-mooney cool ill re reivew. di that work locally for you https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/933022/9/nova/db/main/api.py
13:45:41 jlejeune sean-k-mooney: yes it works as expected
13:56:40 opendevreview Kamil Sambor proposed openstack/nova master: Switch nova-conductor to use global executor https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/962478
14:27:51 ratailor sean-k-mooney, gibi could you please review https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963348 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/961352 and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/961211
14:32:22 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/placement master: Prune a_c search space by invalid prefixes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/962776
14:32:30 gibi dansmith: I will accept the heat for it but I ended up changing the whole pruning logic while tried to pull out the capacity check function call and the odometer logic. I ended up dropping the odometer logic in favor of a recusive tree search as it results in a lot cleaner code and allows one extra optimization out of the box that is dropping half of the steps out in the symmetric case. So the 3by3
14:32:36 gibi test now checks only 30 partial candidates not 60. This gives us even more performance buffer. I also managed to avoid changing the conditional ARR copy logic which is a nice risk reduction alone. ^^
14:32:56 dansmith ooof
14:38:34 sean-k-mooney gibi: long term do you think we will want to keep the fallback to itertools.product
14:39:13 sean-k-mooney gibi: if the performace is simialr for small trees i wonder if we coudl jsut alwasy use the new soltuion

Earlier   Later