On 5/24/2018 8:33 PM, Jeffrey Zhang wrote:
Recently, i am trying to implement a function which aggregate nova
hypervisors
rather than nova compute host. But seems nova only aggregate
nova-compute host.
On the other hand, since Ocata, nova depends on placement api which supports
aggregating
I'd like to understand the phrase "StarlingX is an OpenStack Foundation Edge
focus area project".
My understanding of the current situation is that "StarlingX would like to be
OpenStack Foundation Edge focus area project".
I have not been able to keep up with all of the discussions so I'd be
not sure whether it will helpful , FYI
https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/placement/
The primary differences between Nova’s host aggregates and placement
aggregates are the following:
In Nova, a host aggregate associates a nova-compute service with
other nova-compute services.
Recently, i am trying to implement a function which aggregate nova
hypervisors
rather than nova compute host. But seems nova only aggregate nova-compute
host.
On the other hand, since Ocata, nova depends on placement api which supports
aggregating resource providers. But nova-scheduler doesn't
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 06:34:06PM -0500, Eric Fried wrote:
:How long are you willing to wait?
:
:The work we're doing to use Placement from Nova ought to allow us to
:model both of these things nicely from the virt driver, and request them
:nicely from the flavor.
:
:By the end of Rocky we will
How long are you willing to wait?
The work we're doing to use Placement from Nova ought to allow us to
model both of these things nicely from the virt driver, and request them
nicely from the flavor.
By the end of Rocky we will have laid a large percentage of the
groundwork to enable this. This
Hi,
I'd like to know what's the status of neutron-rpc-server. As I switched
the Debian package from neutron-server to neutron-api using uwsgi, I
tried using it, and it seems it kind of works, if I apply this patch:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/555608
Is there anything else that I should
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:59:16AM +1000, Blair Bethwaite wrote:
:Hi Jon,
:
:Following up to the question you asked during the HPC on OpenStack
:panel at the summit yesterday...
:
:You might have already seen Daniel Berrange's blog on this topic:
I've written a nova-manage placement heal_allocations CLI [1] which was
a TODO from the PTG in Dublin as a step toward getting existing
CachingScheduler users to roll off that (which is deprecated).
During the CERN cells v1 upgrade talk it was pointed out that CERN was
able to go from
I've written a nova-manage placement heal_allocations CLI [1] which was
a TODO from the PTG in Dublin as a step toward getting existing
CachingScheduler users to roll off that (which is deprecated).
During the CERN cells v1 upgrade talk it was pointed out that CERN was
able to go from
Hi Jon,
Following up to the question you asked during the HPC on OpenStack
panel at the summit yesterday...
You might have already seen Daniel Berrange's blog on this topic:
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:26:07PM -0700, Melvin Hillsman wrote:
: I think a great model we have in general as a community is if people
: show up to do the work, it is not something crazy, get out of their
: way; at least that is how I think of it. I apologize if there is any
: perception
I think a great model we have in general as a community is if people show
up to do the work, it is not something crazy, get out of their way; at
least that is how I think of it. I apologize if there is any perception
opposed to my previous statement by me bringing up the other repos. I tried
to be
> For example, I look at your nova fork and it has a "don't allow this
> call during an upgrade" decorator on many API calls. Why wasn't that
> done upstream? It doesn't seem overly controversial, so it would be
> useful to understand the reasoning for that change.
Interesting. We have internal
Hi, Shyam
> tester => {
> id => 'test:tester',
> key => 'testing',
> },
If you are using this id/password to get your token from keystone,
you should set them as access_key and secret key for your s3 client.
You don't have to set any token information from keystone for
Hi Torin,
I double checked with Cinder and you are correct the port should be 5000. I’ll
get it bugged and patched after Summit.
Thanks,
Amy (spotz)
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 24, 2018, at 5:36 AM, Torin Woltjer
> wrote:
>
> I've upgraded from pike to
Hello,
Please, try `cinder --os-volume-api-versio=3 manageable-list
openstack-dev@VMAX_ISCSI_DIAMOND#Diamond+DSS+SRP_1+000297000333` or
`OS_VOLUME_API_VERSION=3 cinder manageable-list openstack-dev@VMAX_ISCSI_
DIAMOND#Diamond+DSS+SRP_1+000297000333`
Devstack used Cinder API v2 by default before
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 07:07:10AM -0700, Doug Hellmann wrote:
:I know you wanted to avoid lots of governance overhead, so I want
:to just mention that establishing a SIG is meant to be a painless
:and light-weight way to declare that a group of interested people
:exists so that others can find
My intention based on current understandign would be to create a git
repo called "osops-docs" as this fits current naming an thin initial
document we intend to put there and the others we may adopt from
docs-team.
My understanding being they don't to have this type of
documentention due to much
On 5/23/18 6:49 PM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote:
Alex,
the problem is that you're working and focusing mostly on release
specific code like featuresets and some scripts. But
tripleo-quickstart(-extras) and tripleo-ci is much *much* more than set
of featuresets. Only 10% of the code may be related
Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2018-05-23 22:58:40 -0700:
> Excerpts from Melvin Hillsman's message of 2018-05-23 22:26:02 -0700:
> > Great to see this moving. I have some questions/concerns based on your
> > statement Doug about docs.openstack.org publishing and do not want to
> >
On 05/24/2018 08:45 PM, Ian Wienand wrote:
> On 05/24/2018 05:40 PM, Ian Wienand wrote:
>> In an effort to resolve this, the afs01 & 02 servers were restarted to
>> clear all old transactions, and for the affected mirrors I essentially
>> removed their read-only copies and re-added them with:
>
>
I've upgraded from pike to queens, and the keystone admin port 35357 has been
deprecated in favor of 5000 it seems. However, the documentation for the
installation of cinder still uses that port in [keystone_authtoken]. What is
the correct entry for this line? auth_url = http://controller:5000
Hi,
I've been trying to get swift3 to work for several days now. But I haven't
managed to get it running.
Both with tempauth and keystoneauth, I'm getting the same error:
eightkpc@objectstore1:~/s3curl$ ./s3curl.pl --id=testerks --
http://127.0.0.1:8080/
SignatureDoesNotMatchThe request
As discussed in the IRC over , here is the outline:
* Derive parameters workflow could be used for deriving FixedIPs
parameters also (started as part of the review
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/569818/)
* Above derivation should be done for all the deployments, so invoking
of derive parameters
On 05/24/2018 05:40 PM, Ian Wienand wrote:
> In an effort to resolve this, the afs01 & 02 servers were restarted to
> clear all old transactions, and for the affected mirrors I essentially
> removed their read-only copies and re-added them with:
It seems this theory of removing the volumes and
Glad to hear it!
Always monitor rabbitmq queues to identify bottlenecks !! :)
Cheers
Saverio
Il gio 24 mag 2018, 11:07 Radu Popescu | eMAG, Technology <
radu.pope...@emag.ro> ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> did the change yesterday. Had no issue this morning with neutron not being
> able to move fast
Sending on Michael's behalf...
From: McAleer, Michael
Sent: Monday 21 May 2018 15:18
To: 'openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org'
Subject: FW: [openstack-dev] [cinder]
Hi Cinder Devs,
I would like to ask a question concerning Cinder CLI commands in DevStack
13.0.0.0b2.dev167.
I stacked a clean
Hi,
did the change yesterday. Had no issue this morning with neutron not being able
to move fast enough. Still, we had some storage issues, but that's another
thing.
Anyway, I'll leave it like this for the next few days and report back in case I
get the same slow neutron errors.
Thanks a lot!
Hi,
We were notified of an issue around 22:45GMT with the volumes backing
the storage on afs02.dfw.o.o, which holds R/O mirrors for our AFS
volumes.
It seems that during this time there were a number of "vos release"s
in flight, or started, that ended up with volumes in a range of
unreliable
Sure definitely, that's why I said I was not trying to detour the
conversation, but rather asking for feedback. Definitely agree things
should continue to plow forward and Chris has been doing an excellent job
here and I think it is awesome that he is continuing to push this.
On Wed, May 23, 2018
+1 .. his reviews have always been helpful to me
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 7:57 AM, Shivanand Tendulker
wrote:
> +1 from me.
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Julia Kreger > wrote:
>
>> Greetings everyone!
>>
>> I would like to propose
Excerpts from Melvin Hillsman's message of 2018-05-23 22:26:02 -0700:
> Great to see this moving. I have some questions/concerns based on your
> statement Doug about docs.openstack.org publishing and do not want to
> detour the conversation but ask for feedback. Currently there are a number
I'm
33 matches
Mail list logo