| *** mhen_ is now known as mhen | 02:27 | |
| *** ykarel_ is now known as ykarel | 05:59 | |
| opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Update start_service() function in test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963848 | 09:39 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Adds regression test for bug LP#2085135 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963849 | 09:39 |
| opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963850 | 09:39 |
| Uggla | gmaan, lgtm. +1 on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/968410, I have added bauzas and gibi because I think we can go ahead. | 09:58 |
| opendevreview | Dominik proposed openstack/nova master: Remove Placement allocations in the broken build cleanup https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/968446 | 11:27 |
| gibi | dansmith: bauzas: Uggla: Kamil: I need to skip the eventlet sync today. Sorry. Feel free to have it without me. | 13:55 |
| gibi | sean-k-mooney: ^^ | 13:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | ack, i have a meeting before it which might over run so i may or may not be there either | 13:59 |
| sean-k-mooney | gibi: heh fun, you know the way we say we dont reallly supprot runing addtional libvirt vms on the same host even though its techinally possible | 14:04 |
| sean-k-mooney | https://paste.opendev.org/show/beuKA1lA9Pt5xDTYYwJR/ | 14:04 |
| sean-k-mooney | this is one of hte way tha tcan break things | 14:04 |
| sean-k-mooney | basicaly if nova cant access the disk images then it would break update aviable resouces | 14:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | sean-k-mooney: hey! have a discussion point around one of the comment on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/900296/7/specs/2026.1/approved/cross-az-instance-scheduling.rst if you have a minute | 14:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | I've addressed all points (did not push them yet), except `cross_az_attach` | 14:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | As my way of thinking was that I don't need care about that in this spec, as it will be handled here anyway: https://opendev.org/openstack/nova/src/commit/23b462d77df1a1d09c43d0918bca853ef3af1e3f/nova/compute/api.py#L1429-L1430 | 14:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | so if it won't be matching, `MismatchVolumeAZException` will be raised | 14:42 |
| opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Update start_service() function in test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963848 | 14:49 |
| opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Adds regression test for bug LP#2085135 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963849 | 14:49 |
| opendevreview | Julien LE JEUNE proposed openstack/nova stable/2024.2: Reset the mapped field of nodes at service deletion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/963850 | 14:49 |
| sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: so cross_az attach is a per compute node opiton | 14:49 |
| noonedeadpunk | it seems it's currently verified on api side already? | 14:50 |
| noonedeadpunk | as iirc nova.compute.api is api-side? | 14:50 |
| sean-k-mooney | my point is if you dont configure in the api and only configure it the comptue nodes which is allowed then it will fail late | 14:51 |
| noonedeadpunk | oh, yes | 14:51 |
| noonedeadpunk | but I think it's already the case today? I am just thinking if this is smth which should be addressed in spec at all | 14:51 |
| sean-k-mooney | we just need to document that in the spec | 14:52 |
| sean-k-mooney | in generally i woudl prefer to remove that config option entirly and either replace it with nothing or a flavor extra spec | 14:52 |
| sean-k-mooney | this shoudl never have been setable on a per compute basis | 14:52 |
| sean-k-mooney | but that proably not somethign we can do at this point | 14:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | the reason why I'm raising this, is that we are actually having cross_az_attach=False here.... | 14:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | And made it working *somehow* | 14:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | it built on the false premiss that nova AZ names and AZ names in any other service shoudl align | 14:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | In *some* cases... | 14:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | so if you set cross_az_attach=False in the api then we will end up pinnign the vm to the az of the voluem if and only if you pass in a volume | 14:54 |
| noonedeadpunk | So I'd really love to leave "status quo" for this specific spec wrt cross_az_attach | 14:54 |
| sean-k-mooney | if on the other hand nova creates the voluem i dont think we pin it because we create teh volume after schdulign i think | 14:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | Yes, I think it's true actually | 14:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | noonedeadpunk: yes im not asking you to change the behvior fomr today | 14:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | just document what it iss | 14:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | ++ | 14:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, shoot... | 14:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | so basically, it would make things worse, or indeed I'd need to address that in implementation.... | 14:56 |
| noonedeadpunk | or well... | 14:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | you can litrally punt an just say "this will not change the behvior of cross_az_attach" and if its disabel then it will fail if there is a confilct | 14:56 |
| noonedeadpunk | ++ | 14:57 |
| noonedeadpunk | I am literally failing now to set in my head cross_az_attach behavior in all scenarios.... | 14:57 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, thanks, will do that then | 14:58 |
| sean-k-mooney | yep because its stupily complicated. the default is true which mean sthe api does nto condier the voluem az by default | 14:59 |
| sean-k-mooney | if you only set it to false on the compute we only check it there | 14:59 |
| sean-k-mooney | if you onely set it on the api we will validate teh az request in the build request vs the volume | 15:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | and we will use the volume's az if there isnt a conflict | 15:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | there is some other behvior thace chages as well | 15:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | unless you create an instance with `--boot-fropm-volume` | 15:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | yep in which case the voluem i think get create on the compute node :) | 15:01 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/nova-specs master: [spec] Add Cross-AZ scheduling blueprint https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/900296 | 15:02 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/nova-specs master: [spec] Add Cross-AZ scheduling blueprint https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/900296 | 15:12 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Re-propose vTPM live migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/961564 | 17:21 |
| tkajinam | dansmith, hi ! It'd be nice if you can spare some time to check this discussion with Uggla https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/966584/comment/24e4946c_0522d2cf/ ,regarding how we handle firmware used by existing vms during hard-reboot. | 17:26 |
| * tkajinam might be offline soon, though | 17:27 | |
| dansmith | okay I'll try.. my list is stacked pretty deep and we're off the rest of the week here, as you probably know | 17:27 |
| tkajinam | dansmith, thx and yeah I heard that | 17:29 |
| tkajinam | I'll check with Uggla if I can update that part later (after merging the current version) or I can get spec freeze exception, if we need some more time/discussions | 17:30 |
| Uggla | tkajinam, that's ok for me | 17:31 |
| opendevreview | Will Szumski proposed openstack/nova master: Randomise best hosts https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/968544 | 18:47 |
| opendevreview | Sean Mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] create ResourceSummaryNotification object https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/968558 | 19:56 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!