| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2026-10-21 | |||
| 13:28:42 | sean-k-mooney | although that can race | |
| 13:29:01 | sean-k-mooney | if your talking to 2 apis at the same time so we always need the instnace lock on teh compute regardless | |
| 13:30:31 | sean-k-mooney | the instance lock on the compute agent is also one of the things that guards agaisn starting a cinder volume migrate or retype durign say an instance live migrate | |
| 13:30:58 | tkajinam | I personally prefer api level lock and reject concurrent actions explicitly so that revert action can be simplified | |
| 13:31:01 | sean-k-mooney | the task state shoudl also help but its the final backstop to prevent 2 operations form trying to muteate the domain at the same time | |
| 13:31:12 | tkajinam | yeah | |
| 13:31:40 | sean-k-mooney | tkajinam: same but that does rely on use updating the task state before doing the rpc to the compute or ealy in the conductor flow | |
| 13:33:30 | tkajinam | 1006786 added task state update in conductor layer so that implements what you said iiuc | |
| 13:33:33 | sean-k-mooney | basicly if task state is the primary guard then the api has to update it before doing an rpc to the conducotr or comptue for all instnace actions | |
| 13:33:45 | tkajinam | it's not lock at api layer(which I said) but conductor layer | |
| 13:33:53 | sean-k-mooney | tkajinam: the conductor is kind fo too late but its better then the compute | |
| 13:34:08 | tkajinam | yeah I understand | |
| 13:34:48 | sean-k-mooney | the action are async and diffent conductors could start processing it howpever wehn we do save we pass the expefcteed state | |
| 13:35:03 | sean-k-mooney | so one of the 2 conductor shoudl get a db error and fail teh second attach | |
| 13:35:55 | sean-k-mooney | i think that is fine. we do not provide any ordering guarentey for concurnet api calls anyway | |
| 13:37:02 | sean-k-mooney | im bit surpprosed that no functional regression test was created for this bug however | |
| 13:37:33 | sean-k-mooney | this is they type of bug where we normally required those before proceeding with the fix | |
| 13:38:59 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas0: was there a reason you didnt create a functional regression test first to demonstrate the race? | |
| 13:45:55 | tkajinam | I've made the job non-voting in the mean time but also proposed 1011657 to stop testing concurrent attachments. just fyi... | |
| 13:51:55 | sean-k-mooney | ack | |
| 13:52:12 | sean-k-mooney | tkajinam: what job was failing? | |
| 13:52:36 | sean-k-mooney | and is that test in core tempest or a plugin? | |
| 13:52:38 | tkajinam | sean-k-mooney, cinder-tempest-plugin-lvm-concurrency-tests job | |
| 13:52:43 | sean-k-mooney | ah ok | |
| 13:52:51 | tkajinam | the failing test case is in cinder-tempest-plugin | |
| 13:52:58 | sean-k-mooney | i was just wonderign why id was not failing on our gate | |
| 13:53:32 | tkajinam | yeah | |
| 13:54:04 | tkajinam | the plugin has a few test cases testing concurrent operations (such as concurrent volume creations, concurrent volume backups) and concurrent volume attachments is one of these | |
| 13:54:30 | tkajinam | though I feel like these tests can reside in core tempest | |
| 13:55:17 | tkajinam | hm interestingly that job only runs in cinder-tempest-plugin. idk why | |
| 15:54:28 | opendevreview | Michael Sherman proposed openstack/nova master: ironic: Restore retries on 409 and 503 from Ironic https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/1011683 | |
| 18:34:04 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Enable G (flake8-logging-format) rules https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/998557 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2026-10-22 | |||
| 07:19:42 | opendevreview | Kamil Sambor proposed openstack/nova master: Default native threading for CLI entry points https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/1011606 | |
| 12:06:11 | root2 | exit | |
| 12:08:35 | na-te | sean-k-mooney: Hi ! Hope you are well ! I implemented the changes you requested in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/1009444. CI is green again. Is there anything else I should do to get the final review ? Thanks a lot for your help ! | |