On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> Thanks for doing this. I dug into the test_volume_boot_pattern test to see
> what was going on.
>
> On the first boot, Nova called Neutron to create a port at 23:29:44 and it
> took 441ms to return the port to Nova.[1]
>
Thanks for doing this. I dug into the test_volume_boot_pattern test to see
what was going on.
On the first boot, Nova called Neutron to create a port at 23:29:44 and it
took 441ms to return the port to Nova.[1]
Nova then plugged the interface for that port into OVS a little over 6
seconds later
On 03/21/2016 09:48 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:37 PM, Assaf Muller wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Clark Boylan
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:15 PM, Assaf Muller wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Clark Boylan
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:37 PM, Assaf Muller wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Clark Boylan
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:15 PM, Assaf Muller wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Clark Boylan
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> If what
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:15 PM, Assaf Muller wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Clark Boylan
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 01:23 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> >> On 03/21/2016 04:09
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:15 PM, Assaf Muller wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Clark Boylan
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 01:23 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> >> On 03/21/2016 04:09 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Clark Boylan
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 01:23 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> On 03/21/2016 04:09 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 01:23 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 03/21/2016 04:09 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 09:32 AM, Armando M. wrote:
> Do you have
On 03/21/2016 04:09 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 09:32 AM, Armando M. wrote:
Do you have an a better insight of job runtimes vs jobs in other
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 09:32 AM, Armando M. wrote:
> > > Do you have an a better insight of job runtimes vs jobs in other
> > > projects?
> > > Most of the time in the job runtime
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 09:32 AM, Armando M. wrote:
> > Do you have an a better insight of job runtimes vs jobs in other
> > projects?
> > Most of the time in the job runtime is actually spent setting the
> > infrastructure up, and I am
On 21 March 2016 at 11:08, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 09:32 AM, Armando M. wrote:
> > Do you have an a better insight of job runtimes vs jobs in other
> > projects?
> > Most of the time in the job runtime is actually spent setting the
> > infrastructure
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 09:32 AM, Armando M. wrote:
> Do you have an a better insight of job runtimes vs jobs in other
> projects?
> Most of the time in the job runtime is actually spent setting the
> infrastructure up, and I am not sure we can do anything about it, unless
> we
> take this with
On 21 March 2016 at 04:15, Rossella Sblendido wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> the tests that we run on the gate for Neutron take pretty long (longer
> than one hour). I think we can improve that and make better use of the
> resources.
Here are some ideas that came up when Ihar and
On 21 March 2016 at 04:32, Sean M. Collins wrote:
> Rossella Sblendido wrote:
> > 2) multi-node jobs run for every patch set. Is that really what we want?
> > They take pretty long. We could move them to a periodic job.
>
> I would rather remove all the single-node jobs. Nova
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 5:40 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
>
> Sean M. Collins wrote:
>
>> Rossella Sblendido wrote:
>>> 2) multi-node jobs run for every patch set. Is that really what we want?
>>> They take pretty long. We could move them to a periodic
Sean M. Collins wrote:
Rossella Sblendido wrote:
2) multi-node jobs run for every patch set. Is that really what we want?
They take pretty long. We could move them to a periodic job.
I would rather remove all the single-node jobs. Nova has been moving to
multinode jobs
Rossella Sblendido wrote:
> 2) multi-node jobs run for every patch set. Is that really what we want?
> They take pretty long. We could move them to a periodic job.
I would rather remove all the single-node jobs. Nova has been moving to
multinode jobs for their gate (if I recall correctly my
Hello all,
the tests that we run on the gate for Neutron take pretty long (longer
than one hour). I think we can improve that and make better use of the
resources.
Here are some ideas that came up when Ihar and I discussed this topic
during the sprint in Brno:
1) We have few jobs that are
19 matches
Mail list logo