Hi,
I'd like to propose (and implement) a feature for Liberty that would allow
configuration of the pinning of the emulator when CPU pinning is enabled.
(Currently the emulator is affined to the logical OR of all pCPUs used by the
instance.)
The general idea is to add an optional flavor
On 03/23/2015 03:28 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
We are not stopping vendor specific API endpoints, that appear
separately in the keystone catalog. Certainly, thats where I hope
things that would never go upstream will move to.
How would that be expected to work for things where it's fundamentally
Hi,
I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I noticed
something that may be problematic.
The way microversions are handled, there is a monotonically increasing
MAX_API_VERSION value in nova/api/openstack/api_version_request.py. When you
want to make a change you
Hi,
I think I've found some bugs around host aggregates in the documentation,
curious what people think.
The docs at
http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/config-reference/content/section_compute-scheduler.html#host-aggregates;
contain this:
nova aggregate-create name availability-zone
On 03/18/2015 09:35 AM, Steve Gordon wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com
I think I've found some bugs around host aggregates in the documentation,
curious what people think.
Agree on both counts, can you file a bug against openstack-manuals
On 03/16/2015 03:23 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 14/03/2015 01:13, Chris Friesen a écrit :
1) Do I need to do anything special in obj_make_compatible()?
Yes, you need to make sure that you won't provide the new field to a previous
version of Service object.
See other examples on other objects
On 03/17/2015 02:33 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
Digging up this old thread because I am working on getting multi node live
migration testing working (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/165182/), and just
ran into this issue (bug 1398999).
And I am not sure I agree with this statement. I think there is
On 03/13/2015 07:50 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 08:42:25AM -0400, Steve Gordon wrote:
- Original Message -
From: park jianlong...@gmail.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
hello Nova
By
Hi,
I've recently submitted some code for review at
https://review.openstack.org/163060;.
The change involves adding a new reported_at field to the Service object
class, and I'd like some feedback on the object-versioning aspects of that:
1) Do I need to do anything special in
On 03/12/2015 12:13 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 03/12/2015 02:03 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
Hi,
I'm having an issue with microversions.
The api_version() code has a comment saying This decorator MUST appear
first (the outermost decorator) on an API method for it to work correctly
I tried making
On 03/12/2015 05:29 PM, Mike Bayer wrote:
snip
If we assume that all of our tables are filled up with zeroes for those
deleted columns, because that’s the default, this **wipes the whole table
clean**.
How do the tests pass? Well the tests are in test_db_api-ArchiveTestCase,
and actually,
I'm looking for some technical advice on API extensions.
I want to add a new field to the output of the nova service-list command,
which currently maps to ServiceController.index().
For the v2 API this seems straightforward, I can add a new extension and in the
existing function I can call
On 03/12/2015 08:47 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
I'm looking for some technical advice on API extensions.
I want to add a new field to the output of the nova service-list command,
which currently maps to ServiceController.index().
For the v2 API this seems straightforward, I can add a new
Hi,
I'm having an issue with microversions.
The api_version() code has a comment saying This decorator MUST appear first
(the outermost decorator) on an API method for it to work correctly
I tried making a microversioned static class method like this:
@wsgi.Controller.api_version(2.4)
So I've been playing with microversions and noticed that the information about
req.ver_obj.matches(start_version, end_version) in the spec doesn't actually
match what's in the codebase.
1) The code has req.api_version_request instead of req.ver_obj
2) The spec says that end_version is
Hi,
I'm working on bug #1420848 which addresses the issue that doing a
service-disable followed by a service-enable against a down compute node
will result in the compute node going up for a while, possibly causing delays
to operations that try to schedule on that compute node.
The
On 03/02/2015 06:24 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 02/25/2015 06:41 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 02:08:32PM +, Gary Kotton wrote:
I understand that this is a high or critical bug but I think that
we need to discuss more on it and try have a more robust model.
What I'm
...@cn.ibm.com
Phone: +86-10-82454158
Address: 3/F Ring Building, ZhongGuanCun Software Park, Haidian District,
Beijing 100193, PRC
Inactive hide details for Chris Friesen ---03/11/2015 04:35:01 PM---Hi, I'm
working on bug #1420848 which addresses the issue tChris Friesen ---03/11/2015
04:35:01 PM---Hi, I'm
Hi...it would be good to test a bunch of the
hugepages/pinning/multi-numa-node-guests/etc. features with real hardware. The
normal testing doesn't cover much of that since it's hardware-agnostic.
Chris
On 01/07/2015 08:31 PM, yongli he wrote:
Hi,
Intel set up a Hardware based Third Part
On 02/24/2015 05:46 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-02-24 10:00:51 -0800 (-0800), Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
[...]
Recently, I have spent a lot more time waiting on reviews than I
have spent writing the actual code.
That's awesome, assuming what you mean here is that you've spent
more time
On 02/16/2015 01:17 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:25 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
Agree with Nikola, the claim already checking that. And instance booting
must be failed if there isn't pci device. But I still think it should go
through the filters, because in the future we may move the
Hi all,
Just thought I'd highlight here that Ubuntu 14.10 is using qemu 2.1, but they're
not currently enabling NUMA support.
I've reported it as a bug and it's been fixed for 15.04, but there is some
pushback about fixing it in 14.10 on the grounds that it is a feature
enhancement and not
On 02/12/2015 03:44 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Any action done by the operator is always more important than what the Scheduler
could decide. So, in an emergency situation, the operator wants to force a
migration to an host, we need to accept it and do it, even if it doesn't match
what the
As part of https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/virt-driver-large-pages;
we have introduced the ability to specify based on flavor/image that we want to
use huge pages.
Is there a way to query the number of huge pages available on each NUMA node of
each compute node?
I haven't been
On 02/02/2015 01:27 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote:
On 2015-02-02 11:36 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 01/30/2015 06:26 AM, Jesse Pretorius wrote:
Have you tried manually updating the NoVNC and websockify files to later
versions from source?
We were already using a fairly recent version of websockify
Hi,
I'm trying to make use of huge pages as described in
http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/kilo/implemented/virt-driver-large-pages.html;.
I'm running kilo as of Jan 27th.
I've allocated 1 2MB pages on a compute node. virsh capabilities on that
node contains:
On 01/30/2015 06:26 AM, Jesse Pretorius wrote:
On 29 January 2015 at 04:57, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com
mailto:chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
On 01/28/2015 10:33 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote:
On 2015-01-28 11:13 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
Anyone have any
On 02/02/2015 12:13 PM, Ian Wells wrote:
On 2 February 2015 at 09:49, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com
Indeed. Does tempest support hugepages/NUMA/pinning?
This is a running discussion, but largely no - because this is ited to the
capabilities of the host, there's no guarantee
On 02/02/2015 11:00 AM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 10:44:09AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to make use of huge pages as described in
http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/kilo/implemented/virt-driver-large-pages.html;.
I'm running kilo
On 02/02/2015 10:51 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
This is a bug that I discovered when fixing some of the NUMA related nova
objects. I have a patch that should fix it up shortly.
Any chance you could point me at it or send it to me?
This is what happens when we don't have any functional testing of
Hi all,
I'm playing around with nova (current trunk) and I've hit an odd issue.
I can get the novnc console for instances to show up on iceweasel 31.3.0, but it
doesn't work in konqueror, internet explorer, or firefox 31.0. Anyone got any
ideas where to start digging?
In the problematic
On 01/28/2015 10:33 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote:
On 2015-01-28 11:13 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
Anyone have any suggestions on where to start digging?
We have a similar issue which has yet to be properly diagnosed on our side.
One workaround which looks to be working for us is enabling
On 01/26/2015 05:37 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 01/26/2015 07:33 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
Hi,
I'm interested in the recent work around NUMA support for guest
instances
(https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/virt-driver-numa-placement), but
I'm having some difficulty figuring out what
Hi,
I'm interested in the recent work around NUMA support for guest instances
(https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/virt-driver-numa-placement), but
I'm having some difficulty figuring out what versions of libvirt and qemu are
required.
From the research that I've done it seems like
How do I regenerate the doc/api_samples tests if I change the corresponding
template?
The instructions in nova/tests/functional/api_samples/README.rst say to run
GENERATE_SAMPLES=True tox -epy27 nova.tests.unit.integrated, but that path
doesn't exist anymore.
I suspect the instructions
On 10/23/2014 04:24 PM, Preston L. Bannister wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:04 PM, John Griffith john.griffi...@gmail.com
mailto:john.griffi...@gmail.com wrote:
The debate about whether to wipe LV's pretty much massively
depends on the intelligence of the underlying store. If
On 10/19/2014 09:33 AM, Avishay Traeger wrote:
Hi Preston,
Replies to some of your cinder-related questions:
1. Creating a snapshot isn't usually an I/O intensive operation. Are
you seeing I/O spike or CPU? If you're seeing CPU load, I've seen the
CPU usage of cinder-api spike sometimes - not
On 10/09/2014 08:12 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2014-09-30 01:38:29 + (+), Jeremy Stanley wrote:
[...]
the tips of these branches have been tagged havana-eol in
preparation for branch deletion. The list of affected Git
repositories is as follows:
openstack-dev/devstack
On 10/06/2014 11:39 AM, Adam Lawson wrote:
I like your suggestion about the Docs team being advisors. I would
submit however (my opinion here) that whether or not there are enough
resources on the Doc'n team to handle Openstack's current list of
integrated programs, offloading the work to
On 10/03/2014 11:38 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014, Joe Gordon wrote:
Many of those services expect[1] to be able to send notifications (or
be polled by) ceilometer[2]. We've got an ongoing thread about the need
to contractualize notifications. Are those contracts (or the desire
for
On 10/03/2014 02:33 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
So a bit of background here. This began from thinking about functional
dependencies, and pondering whether a map of the dependency graph of
our projects could inform our gating structure, specifically to
encourage (or dare I say, actually force) all
On 10/03/2014 07:50 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
Here's my current thinking and plan of attack on multiple fronts. Oh,
that analogy is so militaristic, I'd revise more peacefully but ...
time. :)
1. We need better page-based design and navigation for many of our docs.
I'm working with the Foundation
On 10/02/2014 08:10 AM, Oleg Bondarev wrote:
Hi,
It turns out that there is a 1:1 relationship between
rpc_thread_pool_size messaging config [1] and the number of instances
that can be spawned simultaneously.
Please see bug [2] for more details.
I think this should be at least documented.
Hi,
I'm interested in running nova evacuate on an instance that has local
storage but was booted from a cinder volume. OpenStack allows
live-migration of this sort of instance, so I'm assuming that we would
want to allow evacuation as well...
I'm getting ready to test it, but I see that
On 10/01/2014 12:37 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
IMO, the term state should be the only one used in the OpenStack APIs
to refer to the condition of some thing at a point in time. The term
state can and should be prefaced with a refining descriptor such
task or power to denote the *thing* that the state
On 10/02/2014 01:47 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 10/02/2014 03:14 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 10/01/2014 12:37 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
IMO, the term state should be the only one used in the OpenStack APIs
to refer to the condition of some thing at a point in time. The term
state can and should
On 10/02/2014 02:24 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 10/02/2014 02:29 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
Hi,
I'm interested in running nova evacuate on an instance that has local
storage but was booted from a cinder volume. OpenStack allows
live-migration of this sort of instance, so I'm assuming that we would
On 10/02/2014 10:46 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
After seeing Jay's idea of making a yaml file modeling things and
talking to devananda about this I went ahead and tried to graph the
relationships out.
repo: https://github.com/jogo/graphing-openstack
preliminary YAML file:
Currently in nova we have the vm_state, which according to the code
comments is supposed to represent a VM's current stable (not
transition) state, or what the customer expect the VM to be.
However, we then added in an ERROR state. How does this possibly make
sense given the above
On 10/01/2014 01:23 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 10/01/2014 03:07 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
Currently in nova we have the vm_state, which according to the code
comments is supposed to represent a VM's current stable (not
transition) state, or what the customer expect the VM to be.
However, we
On 09/23/2014 12:19 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/23/2014 02:10 PM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
On Tue, 2014-09-23 at 18:39 +0100, Louis Taylor wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 01:32:50PM -0400, Andrew Laski wrote:
I've been thinking along very similar lines, but I don't think each current
API needs
Hi,
I'm running Havana, and I just tried a testcase involving doing six
simultaneous live-migrations.
It appears that the migrations succeeded, but two of the instances got stuck
with a status of MIGRATING because of RPC timeouts:
2014-09-16 20:35:07.376 12493 INFO nova.notifier [-]
On 09/11/2014 12:50 AM, Jesse Pretorius wrote:
On 10 September 2014 17:20, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com
mailto:chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
I see that the OpenStack high availability guide is still
recommending the active/standby method of configuring RabbitMQ
On 09/11/2014 12:02 PM, Dan Prince wrote:
Maybe I'm impatient (I totally am!) but I see much of the review
slowdown as a result of the feedback loop times increasing over the
years. OpenStack has some really great CI and testing but I think our
focus on not breaking things actually has us
On 09/11/2014 03:01 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 09/11/2014 04:51 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 9/10/2014 6:00 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 09/10/2014 06:46 PM, Joe Cropper wrote:
Hmm, not sure I follow the concern, Russell. How is that any different
from putting a VM into the group when it’s
Hi,
I see that the OpenStack high availability guide is still recommending
the active/standby method of configuring RabbitMQ.
Has anyone tried using active/active with mirrored queues as recommended
by the RabbitMQ developers? If so, what problems did you run into?
Thanks,
Chris
Hi,
I'm running Havana and I'm seeing some less-than-ideal behaviour on rabbitmq
failover. I'd like to figure out if this is expected behaviour or if something
is going wrong.
We're running rabbitmq in active/standby mode with DRBD storage. On the
controller the timeline looks like this:
On 09/10/2014 02:13 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
As it stands, it seems that waiting for the RPC call to time out blocks
_report_state() from running again in report_interval seconds, which delays the
service update until the RPC timeout period expires.
Just noticed something...
In the case
On 09/10/2014 02:44 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:14:43PM -0700, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
I have the impression this idea has been circling around for a while but
for some reason or another (like lack of capabilities in gerrit and
other reasons) we never tried to
On 09/10/2014 04:11 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 09/10/2014 05:55 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
If each hypervisor team mostly only modifies their own code, why would
there be conflict?
As I see it, the only causes for conflict would be in the shared code,
and you'd still need to sort out the issues
On 09/10/2014 04:16 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On Sep 10, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Joe Cropper cropper@gmail.com
wrote:
I would like to craft up a blueprint proposal for Kilo to add two
simple extensions to the existing server group APIs that I believe
will make them infinitely more usable in
On 09/05/2014 03:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
So my biggest fear with a model where each team had their own full
Nova tree and did large pull requests, is that we'd suffer major
pain during the merging of large pull requests, especially if any
of the merges touched common code. It could
On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong
that a BP with multiple positive reviews and no negative reviews is
dropped because of what looks like indifference.
I would posit
On 08/28/2014 02:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong
that a BP with multiple positive reviews
On 08/28/2014 03:02 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from
core team members may actually be a loud statement about where their
priorities are.
Or it could be that they haven't looked at it, aren't aware of it, or
haven't been paying
On 08/28/2014 04:01 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
alan.kavan...@ericsson.com mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com wrote:
I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
clearly describe in the Wiki the process and workflow for the BP
On 08/25/2014 11:25 AM, Joe Cropper wrote:
I was thinking something simple such as only allowing the add
operation to succeed IFF no policies are found to be in violation...
and then nova wouldn't need to get into all the complexities you
mention?
Personally I would be in favour of
On 08/20/2014 09:54 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2014-08-20 14:53:22 -0700:
On 08/20/2014 05:06 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 08/20/2014 07:21 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Thierry, thanks for the reply. Comments inline. :)
On 08/20/2014 06:32 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote
On 08/20/2014 07:21 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Thierry, thanks for the reply. Comments inline. :)
On 08/20/2014 06:32 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
If we want to follow your model, we probably would have to dissolve
programs as they stand right now, and have blessed categories on one
side, and teams
Is there a straightforward way to determine where the time is going when
I run a command from novaclient?
For instance, if I run nova list, that's going to run novaclient,
which will send a message to nova-api, which wakes up and does some
processing and sends a message to nova-conductor,
On 08/07/2014 12:32 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
If we try to limit the number of WIP slots, then surely aspiring
contributors will simply work around that restriction by preparing
the code they're interested in on their own private branches, or
in their github forks?
OK, some pragmatic
On 08/07/2014 04:52 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
I hope you don't think that this thread was about rebases vs merges.
It's about keeping track of your changes without impact on review process.
But if you rebase, what is stopping you from keeping whatever private
history you want and then rebase
On 08/06/2014 05:41 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 06/08/14 18:12, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
2. since hacking takes tremendous amount of time (you're doing a Cool
Feature (tm), nothing less) you need to update some code from
master, so
you're just merging master in to your branch (i.e. using Git as you'd
On 08/06/2014 01:14 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Ben Nemec openst...@nemebean.com
mailto:openst...@nemebean.com wrote:
Again, this is why the tests should pass against all of your commits.
If that's the case, you can verify your changes as you rebase
Hi all,
I was wondering if someone could point me to a doc describing the
threading model for nova.
I know that we use greenthreads to map multiple threads of execution
onto a single native OS thread. And the python GIL results in
limitations as well.
According to the description at
On 07/21/2014 12:03 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Thanks Matthew for the analysis.
I think you missed something though.
Right now the frustration is that unrelated intermittent bugs stop your
presumably good change from getting in.
Without gating, the result would be that even more bugs, many of
On 07/21/2014 04:38 AM, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would like to make the radical proposal that we stop gating on CI
failures. We will continue to run them on every change, but only after
the change has been successfully merged.
Benefits:
* Without rechecks, the gate will use 8 times fewer
On 07/21/2014 09:52 AM, Jay Lau wrote:
Sorry, correct one typo. I mean Promote select_destination as a REST API
2014-07-21 23:49 GMT+08:00 Jay Lau jay.lau@gmail.com
mailto:jay.lau@gmail.com:
Now in OpenStack Nova, select_destination is used by
create/rebuild/migrate/evacuate
On 07/16/2014 11:59 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 07/16/2014 07:27 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
This is a really good point. As someone who has to deal with packaging
issues constantly, it is odd to me that libvirt is one of the few places
where we depend on upstream packaging. We constantly
On 07/14/2014 12:10 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 07/14/2014 10:16 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
From an operator perspective, people waited so long for having a
scheduler doing scheduling and not only resource placement.
Could you elaborate a bit here? What operators are begging for the
scheduler to
On 07/09/2014 05:17 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi all,
Multiple projects are suffering from db lock timeouts due to deadlocks
deep in mysqldb library that we use to interact with mysql servers. In
essence, the problem is due to missing eventlet
On 07/14/2014 11:53 AM, Mike Bayer wrote:
On Jul 14, 2014, at 1:02 PM, Chris Friesen
chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
On 07/14/2014 10:41 AM, Mike Bayer wrote:
if psycopg2 is in use, the set_wait_callback() extension must be
enabled.
...do we need to do something extra to set up
On 07/07/2014 02:29 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Jul 7, 2014 3:47 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 07/07/2014 12:35 PM, Day, Phil wrote:
I’m thinking that there may need to be some additional logic here, so
that group hints passed by name will fail if there is an existing group
with a policy
On 07/08/2014 08:30 AM, Day, Phil wrote:
Sorry, forgot to put this in my previous message. I've been
advocating the ability to use names instead of UUIDs for server
groups pretty much since I saw them last year.
I'd like to just enforce that server group names must be unique
within a tenant,
On 07/07/2014 12:35 PM, Day, Phil wrote:
Hi Folks,
I noticed a couple of changes that have just merged to allow the server
group hints to be specified by name (some legacy behavior around
automatically creating groups).
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83589/
On 07/07/2014 12:35 PM, Day, Phil wrote:
Hi Folks,
I noticed a couple of changes that have just merged to allow the server
group hints to be specified by name (some legacy behavior around
automatically creating groups).
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83589/
On 07/03/2014 10:13 PM, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
I do think the issue these address --- the need to get application logic
involved in, e.g., shutdown --- is most of what an application needs;
involvement in selection of which member(s) to delete is much less
important (provided that clean shutdown
On 06/18/2014 08:35 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
On 18 June 2014 15:28, Matthew Booth mbo...@redhat.com wrote:
The answer is not always more
review: there are other tools in the box. Imagine we spent 50% of the
time we spend on review writing tempest tests instead.
Or we push the work off of core
The output of nova list and nova show reflects the current status in
the database, not the actual state on the compute node.
If the instances in question are on a compute node that is currently
down, then the information is stale and possibly incorrect. Would
there be any benefit in adding
On 06/16/2014 03:33 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
David Kranz wrote:
[...]
There is a different way to do this. We could adopt the same methodology
we have now around gating, but applied to each project on its own
branch. These project branches would be integrated into master at some
frequency or
On 06/12/2014 01:30 PM, Mike Bayer wrote:
the GPL is excepted in the case of MySQL and other MySQL products
released by Oracle (can you imagine such a sentence being
written.), see
http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/foss-exception/.
Okay, good start. mysql itself is out of the
Hi,
I'm looking for the community viewpoint on whether there is any chance
of license contamination between mysql and nova. I realize that lawyers
would need to be involved for a proper ruling, but I'm curious about the
view of the developers on the list.
Suppose someone creates a modified
On 06/07/2014 12:30 AM, Joe Cropper wrote:
Hi Folks,
I was wondering if there was any such mechanism in the compute node
structure to hold arbitrary key-value pairs, similar to flavors'
extra_specs concept?
It appears there are entries for things like pci_stats, stats and
recently added
On 06/09/2014 07:59 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 06/06/2014 08:07 AM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote:
Forcing an instance to a specific host is very useful for the
operator - it fulfills a valid use case for monitoring and testing
purposes.
Pray tell, what is that valid use case?
I find it useful
On 06/03/2014 07:29 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Stackers,
tl;dr
=
Move CPU and RAM allocation ratio definition out of the Nova scheduler
and into the resource tracker. Remove the calculations for overcommit
out of the core_filter and ram_filter scheduler pieces.
Makes sense to me.
Chris
On 05/05/2014 10:51 AM, Steve Gordon wrote:
In addition extra specifications may denote the passthrough of additional
devices, adding another dimension. This seems likely to be the case in the use
case outlined in the original thread [1].
Thanks,
Steve
[1]
On 05/05/2014 11:40 AM, Solly Ross wrote:
One thing that I was discussing with @jaypipes and @dansmith over
on IRC was the possibility of breaking flavors down into separate
components -- i.e have a disk flavor, a CPU flavor, and a RAM flavor.
This way, you still get the control of the size of
On 05/05/2014 12:18 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
As a simplifying view you could keep the existing flavors which group
all of them, while still allowing instances to specify each one
separately if desired.
Also, if we're allowing the cpu/memory/disk to be specified
independently at instance boot
On 04/30/2014 03:41 PM, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote on 04/28/2014 10:44:46 AM:
Using a property of a heat resource
to trigger the creation of a nova resource would not fit that model.
For the sake of your argument, let's pretend that the new ASG
On 04/26/2014 09:41 PM, Jay Lau wrote:
Just noticed this email, I have already filed a blueprint related to
this topic
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/vm-instance-group-support
My idea is that can we add a new field such as PlacemenetPolicy to
AutoScalingGroup? If the value is
301 - 400 of 539 matches
Mail list logo
