Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [Gantt] Scheduler split status

On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 02:38:57PM +, Dugger, Donald D wrote: > Well, my main thought is that I would prefer to see the gantt split > done sooner rather than later. The reality is that we've been trying > to split out the scheduler for months and we're still not there. Until > we bite the bul

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [Gantt] Scheduler split status

On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 09:28:16AM +0200, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > Le 04/07/2014 10:41, Daniel P. Berrange a écrit : > > On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote: > >> On 07/03/2014 01:53 PM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > >>> That doesn't mean Ga

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [Gantt] Scheduler split status

On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 07/03/2014 01:53 PM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > Hi, > > > > == > > tl; dr: A decision has been made to split out the scheduler to a > > separate project not on a feature parity basis with nova-scheduler, your > > comments are welco

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] 3rd Party CI vs. Gerrit

On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 08:26:44AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 6/27/2014 7:35 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 07:40:51AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > >>It's clear that lots of projects want 3rd Party CI information on > >&

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] 3rd Party CI vs. Gerrit

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 07:40:51AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > It's clear that lots of projects want 3rd Party CI information on > patches. But it's also clear that 6 months into this experiment with a > lot of 3rd Party CI systems, the Gerrit UI is really not great for this. That's an understateme

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] top gate bug is libvirt snapshot

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 07:00:32AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > While the Trusty transition was mostly uneventful, it has exposed a > particular issue in libvirt, which is generating ~ 25% failure rate now > on most tempest jobs. > > As can be seen here - > https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/mas

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do any hyperviors allow disk reduction as part of resize ?

-dev] [nova] Do any hyperviors allow disk reduction > > as part of resize ? > > > > On 18 June 2014 21:57, Jay Pipes wrote: > > > On 06/17/2014 05:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 04:32:36PM +0

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][libvirt] Block migrations and Cinder volumes

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote: > I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes are > attached to an instance being migrated. We noticed some unexpected > behavior recently, whereby attached generic NFS-based volumes would become > entirely

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] A modest proposal to reduce reviewer load

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:55:26PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 06/17/2014 12:22 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Duncan Thomas > > wrote: > > > > A far more effective way to reduce the load of trivial review issues

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do any hyperviors allow disk reduction as part of resize ?

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 04:32:36PM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 06/13/2014 02:22 PM, Day, Phil wrote: > > I guess the question I’m really asking here is: “Since we know resize down > > won’t work in all cases, > > and the failure if it does occur will be hard for the user to detect, > > shoul

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] A modest proposal to reduce reviewer load

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 01:12:45PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 17/06/14 12:36, Sean Dague wrote: > > On 06/17/2014 07:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >> If would be nice if gerrit had simple keyword tagging s

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] A modest proposal to reduce reviewer load

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:04:17AM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote: > We all know that review can be a bottleneck for Nova patches.Not only > that, but a patch lingering in review, no matter how trivial, will > eventually accrue rebases which sap gate resources, developer time, and > will to live. > >

[openstack-dev] [FWD] KVM Forum 2014 Call for Participation

- Forwarded message from Paolo Bonzini - > Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 18:08:17 +0200 > From: Paolo Bonzini > To: qemu-devel > Subject: [Qemu-devel] KVM Forum 2014 Call for Participation = KVM Forum 2014: Call For Participation

Re: [openstack-dev] An alternative approach to enforcing "expected election behaviour"

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:04:51AM -0400, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > How about we rely instead on the values and attributes that > actually make our community strong? > > Specifically: maturity, honesty, and a self-correcting nature. > > How about we simply require that each candidate for a TC or PTL

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do any hyperviors allow disk reduction as part of resize ?

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:24:04AM -0700, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > On 06/13/2014 10:53 AM, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > > >On Fri, Jun 13, 2014, Russell Bryant wrote: > > >>On 06/13/2014 09:22 AM, Day, Phil wrote: > > >>>I guess the question I’m re

Re: [openstack-dev] [containers][nova][cinder] Cinder support in containers and unprivileged container-in-container

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 09:57:41PM +, Adrian Otto wrote: > Containers Team, > > The nova-docker developers are currently discussing options for > implementation for supporting mounting of Cinder volumes in > containers, and creation of unprivileged containers-in-containters. > Both of these cu

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] fastest way to run individual tests ?

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:07:37AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/12/2014 06:59 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > Does anyone have any tip on how to actually run individual tests in an > > efficient manner. ie something that adds no more than 1 second penalty > > over &

[openstack-dev] [nova] fastest way to run individual tests ?

When in the middle of developing code for nova I'll typically not wish to the run the entire Nova test suite every time I have a bit of code to verify. I'll just want to run the single test case that deals with the code I'm hacking on. I'm currently writing a 'test_hardware.py' test case for the N

[openstack-dev] [nova] Libvirt Sub-Team Meeting: Call for agenda June 3rd, 2014

If anyone has agenda items they'd like to discuss in today's Nova Libvirt sub-team meeting[1] please add them to the etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-libvirt-meeting-agenda Regards, Daniel [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Libvirt -- |: http://berrange.com -o-

Re: [openstack-dev] Xen and Libvirt.

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:26:18AM +0200, Álvaro López García wrote: > On Tue 27 May 2014 (10:11), Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 09:45:07AM -0400, Alvin Starr wrote: > > > > > > What is the status of Xen and libvirt under Openstack? > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Hide CI comments in Gerrit

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:32:58AM -0400, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 05/27/2014 10:16 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 07:07:54AM -0700, James E. Blair wrote: > >> Radoslav Gerganov writes: > >> > >>> Hi Monty, > >>> > &g

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Hide CI comments in Gerrit

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 07:07:54AM -0700, James E. Blair wrote: > Radoslav Gerganov writes: > > > Hi Monty, > > > >> As a next step - why not take the Javascript you've got there and submit > >> it as a patch to the file above? We can probably figure out a way to > >> template the third party CI

[openstack-dev] [nova] Libvirt Sub-Team Meeting: Call for agenda May 27th, 2014

If anyone has agenda items they'd like to discuss in today's Nova Libvirt sub-team meeting[1] please add them to the etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-libvirt-meeting-agenda Regards, Daniel [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Libvirt -- |: http://berrange.com -o-

Re: [openstack-dev] Xen and Libvirt.

On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 09:45:07AM -0400, Alvin Starr wrote: > > What is the status of Xen and libvirt under Openstack? > I noticed bits of discussions about deprecating the interface but I did not > see any clear answers. There is *no* intention to deprecated it. It was merely marked as being in

Re: [openstack-dev] nova-compute vfsguestfs

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:04:23PM +0530, abhishek jain wrote: > Hi > Below is the code to which I'm going to reffer to.. > > vim /opt/stack/nova/nova/virt/disk/vfs/api.py > > # > > try: > LOG.debug(_("Trying to imp

Re: [openstack-dev] Spec repo names

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 03:27:11AM -0700, James E. Blair wrote: > Hi, > > With apologies to the specs repos we just created, the more I think > about this, the more I think that the right answer is that we should > stick with codenames for the spec repos. The codenames are actually > more discove

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] ANNOUNCE: New Nova Libvirt (Sub-)Team + Meeting

P. Berrange wrote: > Hi Nova developers, > > Since Nova already has sub-teams for HyperV, VMWare, and XenAPI, I feel that > it would be a worthwhile effort to introduce a sub-team + meeting for the > Nova Libvirt driver: > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova#Nova

[openstack-dev] [nova] ANNOUNCE: New Nova Libvirt (Sub-)Team + Meeting

Hi Nova developers, Since Nova already has sub-teams for HyperV, VMWare, and XenAPI, I feel that it would be a worthwhile effort to introduce a sub-team + meeting for the Nova Libvirt driver: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova#Nova_subteams https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Libvi

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [Heat] Custom Nova Flavor creation through Heat (pt.2)

On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 11:22:38AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 07:40:08PM +, Dimitri Mazmanov wrote: > > This is good! Is there a blueprint describing this idea? Or any plans > > describing it in a blueprint? > > Would happily share the wor

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [Heat] Custom Nova Flavor creation through Heat (pt.2)

On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 07:40:08PM +, Dimitri Mazmanov wrote: > This is good! Is there a blueprint describing this idea? Or any plans > describing it in a blueprint? > Would happily share the work. > > Should we mix it with flavors in horizon though? I¹m thinking of having a > separate ³Resour

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [Heat] Custom Nova Flavor creation through Heat (pt.2)

On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 01:40:43PM -0400, 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 c

[openstack-dev] [nova] fyi: summit etherpad instances created

FYI to any Nova people who are leading and/or planning on attending summit sessions in Atlanta, while creating an etherpad for the libvirt session, I also took the time out to create & link to etherpads for all of the Nova summit sessions. You can find them linked from https://wiki.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Add Qcow2 volume encryption support

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 09:17:05AM +, Zhangleiqiang (Trump) wrote: > Hi, all: > > I find Nova has supported volume encryption for LVM volume ([1]). > Currently , qcow2 also support encryption now, and there is libvirt's > support too ([2]). After reading up the implementation, qcow2's su

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] Selecting Compute tests by driver/hypervisor

On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 07:23:20AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 04/22/2014 06:55 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:52:39PM +, Daryl Walleck wrote: > >> I nearly opened a spec for this, but I'd really like to get some > >> feedback f

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] Selecting Compute tests by driver/hypervisor

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:52:39PM +, Daryl Walleck wrote: > I nearly opened a spec for this, but I'd really like to get some > feedback first. One of the challenges I've seen lately for Nova > teams not using KVM or Xen (Ironic and LXC are just a few) is > how to properly run the subset of Com

Re: [openstack-dev] 【openstack-dev】【nova】discussion about add support to SSD ephemeral storage

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:06:03AM +, Yuzhou (C) wrote: > Hi Daniel, > The intention of image type ('default', 'fast', ' shared', > 'sharedfast') look like volume > type in cinder. So I think there are two solutions : I was explicitly *NOT* considering those names to be standardiz

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Thoughts from the PTL

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:01:32AM -0500, Brian Elliott wrote: > > * specs review. The new blueprint process is a work of genius, and I > > think its already working better than what we've had in previous > > releases. However, there are a lot of blueprints there in review, and > > we need to focus

Re: [openstack-dev] 【openstack-dev】【nova】discussion about add support to SSD ephemeral storage

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:17:13AM +, Yuzhou (C) wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Thanks for your comments about this > BP：https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83727/ > > My initial thoughts is to do little changes then get better performance > of guest vm. So it is a bit too narrowly focused

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] /bin/bash vs. /bin/sh

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 11:26:17AM -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: > tldr: I propose we use bash explicitly for all diskimage-builder > scripts (at least for the short-term - see details below). > > This is something that was raised on my linting changes to enable > set -o pipefail. That is a bash-ism, s

Re: [openstack-dev] [olso][neutron] proxying oslo.messaging from management network into tenant network/VMs

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 05:33:49PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote: > Hello developers. > > > As discussed many times so far[1], there are many projects that needs > to propagate RPC messages into VMs running on OpenStack. Neutron in my case. > > My idea is to relay RPC messages from management netw

Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD/bhyve support for nova with libvirt

On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 08:22:37PM +0200, Michał Dubiel wrote: > OK, thanks Russell and Daniel for your suggestions. > > Stackforge sounds reasonable for the time being, though it's not perfect as > it doesn't prevent from occasional conflicts we may hit while pulling > changes from the original N

Re: [openstack-dev] FreeBSD/bhyve support for nova with libvirt

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 01:17:39PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 03/31/2014 01:01 PM, Michał Dubiel wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I have prepared commits I would like to have it reviewed and eventually > > merged that add initial, limited support for FreeBSD as a host to nova. > > It includes bas

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] SR-IOV and IOMMU check

On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 04:59:34AM +, Luohao (brian) wrote: > Now, VFIO hasn't been made generally supported by most enterprise > linux distributions, and as I know, the current pci passthrough > /SR-IOV implementation is still based on a historical approach. > > Probably we can consider the s

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] SR-IOV and IOMMU check

On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:14:49PM -0400, Steve Gordon wrote: > - Original Message - > > This is the approach mentioned by linux-kvm.org > > > > http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/How_to_assign_devices_with_VT-d_in_KVM > > > > 3. reboot and verify that your system has IOMMU support > > > > AM

Re: [openstack-dev] Updating libvirt in gate jobs

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 07:50:15AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Hi Team, > > We have 2 choices > > 1) Upgrade to libvirt 0.9.8+ (See [1] for details) > 2) Enable UCA and upgrade to libvirt 1.2.2+ (see [2] for details) > > For #1, we received a patched deb from @SergeHallyn/@JamesPage and ran

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] [Nova] libvirt+Xen+OVS VLAN networking in icehouse

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 11:01:36AM +0100, Simon Pasquier wrote: > Hi, > > I've played a little with XenAPI + OVS. You might be interested by this > bug report [1] that describes a related problem I've seen in this > configuration. I'm not sure about Xen libvirt though. My assumption is > that the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] FFE Request: Ephemeral RBD image support

at 8:55 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > >>>>On 03/07/2014 11:16 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > >>>>>On 03/07/2014 04:19 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >>>>>>On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 12:20:21AM -0800, Andrew Woodward wrote: > >&g

Re: [openstack-dev] Update on FreeBSD Hypervisor (Bhyve)?

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:16:58PM +1100, Michael Still wrote: > Wasn't the conclusion last time that it would be best to add bhyve support > to libvirt? Yes, and the recent libvirt 1.2.2 release included a first prototype for BHyve driver support thanks to a lot of hard work by FreeBSD developer

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] RFC - using Gerrit for Nova Blueprint review & approval

On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 12:30:15PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Sean Dague wrote: > > One of the issues that the Nova team has definitely hit is Blueprint > > overload. At some point there were over 150 blueprints. Many of them > > were a single sentence. > > > > The results of this have been th

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] RFC - using Gerrit for Nova Blueprint review & approval

On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 01:05:15PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > One of the issues that the Nova team has definitely hit is Blueprint > overload. At some point there were over 150 blueprints. Many of them > were a single sentence. > > The results of this have been that design review today is typicall

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] FFE Request: Oslo: i18n Message improvements

On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 03:46:24PM -0600, James Carey wrote: > Please consider a FFE for i18n Message improvements: > BP: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/i18n-messages > > The base enablement for lazy translation has already been sync'd from > oslo. This patch was to enabl

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] FFE Request: Ephemeral RBD image support

On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 12:20:21AM -0800, Andrew Woodward wrote: > I'd Like to request A FFE for the remaining patches in the Ephemeral > RBD image support chain > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59148/ > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59149/ > > are still open after their dependency > https

Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo] oslo.messaging on VMs

On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 07:25:37PM +0400, Dmitry Mescheryakov wrote: > Hello folks, > > A number of OpenStack and related projects have a need to perform > operations inside VMs running on OpenStack. A natural solution would > be an agent running inside the VM and performing tasks. > > One of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] FFE Request: Image Cache Aging

On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 07:37:39AM -0800, Tracy Jones wrote: > Hi - Please consider the image cache aging BP for FFE > (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56416/) > > This is the last of several patches (already merged) that implement image > cache cleanup for the vmware driver. This patch solves

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] rpc concurrency control rfc

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 04:15:03PM +, Duncan Thomas wrote: > On 28 November 2013 10:14, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > For this specific block zero'ing case it occurred to me that it might > > be sufficient to just invoke 'ionice dd' instead of 'dd

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Concrete Proposal for Keeping V2 API

On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 12:32:04PM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote: > 5) Capitalization and Naming Consistency > > Some of the changes in the v3 API included changes to capitalization and > naming for improved consistency. If we stick with v2 only, we will not > be able to make any of these changes.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Concrete Proposal for Keeping V2 API

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 07:49:03AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > So this thread is getting deep again, as I expect they all will, so I'm > just going to top post and take the ire for doing so. > > I also want to summarize what I've seen in the threads so far: > > v2 needed forever - if I do a sentim

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Concrete Proposal for Keeping V2 API

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 08:46:32AM +1100, Michael Still wrote: > I think its also pretty unfair on the people who put a lot of work > into the v3 API. We're seriously going to delete their code after they > put a year into it? > > To me OpenStack isn't just the users, its also the development > co

Re: [openstack-dev] Proposal to move from Freenode to OFTC

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 11:12:13AM +, Stephen Gran wrote: > On 04/03/14 11:01, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >James E. Blair wrote: > >>Freenode has been having a rough time lately due to a series of DDoS > >>attacks which have been increasingly disruptive to collaboration. > >>Fortunately there's an

Re: [openstack-dev] Guru Meditation output seems useless

On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 02:58:34PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > Dear Solly: > > I cobbled together a working prototype of Guru Meditation for Swift > just to see how it worked. I did not use Oslo classes, but used the > code from Dan's prototype and from your Nova review. Here's the Sigh, pllease

Re: [openstack-dev] heads up, set -o errexit on devstack - things will fail earlier now

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 08:38:22AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > This patch is coming through the gate this morning - > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/71996/ > > The point being to actually make devstack stop when it hits an error, > instead of only once these compound to the point where there is n

Re: [openstack-dev] supported dependency versioning and testing

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:46:22AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > On 02/21/2014 09:45 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 02:45:03PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > >> > >> So I'm one of the first people to utter "if it isn't tested, it's

Re: [openstack-dev] supported dependency versioning and testing

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:31:06AM -0800, Joe Gordon wrote: > Hi All, > > I discussion recently came up inside of nova about what it means > supported version for a dependency means. in libvirt we gate on the > minimal version that we support but for all python dependencies we > gate on the highe

Re: [openstack-dev] supported dependency versioning and testing

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 02:45:03PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > > So I'm one of the first people to utter "if it isn't tested, it's > probably broken", however I also think we need to be realistic about the > fact that if you did out the permutations of dependencies and config > options, we'd have a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] libvirt doesn't migrate cdrom devices?

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:08:59AM -0700, Michael Still wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange > wrote: > > > So I'd saying changing it to 'disk' is out of the question unless > > we unconditionally use vfat as the filesystem instead o

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] libvirt doesn't migrate cdrom devices?

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 09:38:49AM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:34:46PM -0700, Michael Still wrote: > > Hi. > > > > For the last day or so I've been chasing > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1246201, and I think I've fou

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] libvirt doesn't migrate cdrom devices?

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:34:46PM -0700, Michael Still wrote: > Hi. > > For the last day or so I've been chasing > https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1246201, and I think I've found > the problem... libvirt doesn't migrate devices of type cdrom, even if > they're virtual. If I change the type o

Re: [openstack-dev] pep8 gating fails due to tools/config/check_uptodate.sh

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 11:56:35AM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Doug Hellmann > > wrote: > > > >> Including the config file in either the developer documentation or the > >> packaging build makes m

Re: [openstack-dev] pep8 gating fails due to tools/config/check_uptodate.sh

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 05:40:13PM +0100, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Doug Hellmann > wrote: > > > Including the config file in either the developer documentation or the > > packaging build makes more sense. I'm still worried that adding it to the > > sdist generation

Re: [openstack-dev] why do we put a license in every file?

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 04:29:20PM +, Greg Hill wrote: > I'm new, so I'm sure there's some history I'm missing, but I find it > bizarre that we have to put the same license into every single file > of source code in our projects. In my past experience, a single > LICENSE file at the root-level

Re: [openstack-dev] pep8 gating fails due to tools/config/check_uptodate.sh

On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 04:36:05PM +, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 01:19 +0900, Sean Dague wrote: > > On 02/05/2014 12:37 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > > I do realize this would be a rather substantial shift from current > > approach, but current approach seems to be hitting a

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][oslo] pep8 gating fails due to tools/config/check_uptodate.sh

On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 09:19:08AM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 5:09 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 04 2014, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > > > I think the pretty obvious solution here is to *stop* storing > > automatically &

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][oslo] pep8 gating fails due to tools/config/check_uptodate.sh

On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 09:49:15PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > This broke us (nova) again today after python-keystoneclient-0.5.0 > was released with a new config option. Joe Gordon pushed the patch > to fix nova [1] so everyone will need to recheck their patches again > once that merges. >

Re: [openstack-dev] Nova style cleanups with associated hacking check addition

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 01:22:59PM -0500, Joe Gordon wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:45 AM, John Garbutt wrote: > > On 27 January 2014 10:10, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:42:54AM -0500, Joe Gordon wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] nova-network in Icehouse and beyond

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:39:23PM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 01/29/2014 12:27 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 11:47:07AM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote: > >> Greetings, > >> > >> A while back I mentioned that we would revisit th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] nova-network in Icehouse and beyond

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 11:47:07AM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote: > Greetings, > > A while back I mentioned that we would revisit the potential deprecation > of nova-network in Icehouse after the icehouse-2 milestone. The time > has come. :-) > > First, let me recap my high level view of the bloc

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] log message translations

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 01:12:19PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Daniel P. Berrange > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:42:28PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > We have a blueprint open for separating translated log messages into

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] log message translations

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:42:28PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > We have a blueprint open for separating translated log messages into > different domains so the translation team can prioritize them differently > (focusing on errors and warnings before debug messages, for example) [1]. > Feedback?

Re: [openstack-dev] Nova style cleanups with associated hacking check addition

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:42:54AM -0500, Joe Gordon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange > wrote: > > > Periodically I've seen people submit big coding style cleanups to Nova > > code. These are typically all good ideas / beneficial, however,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova]Why not allow to create a vm directly with two VIF in the same network

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 02:11:02PM +, Day, Phil wrote: > I agree its oddly inconsistent (you'll get used to that over time ;-) > - but to me it feels more like the validation is missing on the attach > that that the create should allow two VIFs on the same network. Since > these are both vir

[openstack-dev] Nova style cleanups with associated hacking check addition

Periodically I've seen people submit big coding style cleanups to Nova code. These are typically all good ideas / beneficial, however, I have rarely (perhaps even never?) seen the changes accompanied by new hacking check rules. The problem with not having a hacking check added *in the same commit*

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Libvirt driver platform support

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 01:19:32PM +, balaj...@freescale.com wrote: > Hi, > > Libvert driver has the below code snippet, where it assumes that the Host > platform supports "pit" etc when libvirt is configured for KVM. > > For PowerPC [Freescale] platform below code is causing issues. > > Co

Re: [openstack-dev] [devstack] libvirt default log level

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 01:42:34PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > On 01/15/2014 01:00 PM, Steven Dake wrote: > > On 01/15/2014 10:28 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 09:56:58AM -0700, Steven Dake wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>&

Re: [openstack-dev] [devstack] libvirt default log level

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 09:56:58AM -0700, Steven Dake wrote: > Hi, > > Ken'ichi Omichi submitted a change [1] in devstack to change the > default log level to 1 for libvirt. This results in continual spam > to /var/log/messages in my development system, even after exiting > devstack. The spam lo

Re: [openstack-dev] [devstack] libvirt default log level

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 05:28:07PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 09:56:58AM -0700, Steven Dake wrote: > > Agreed, it is complete insanity to set 'log_level=1' on *any* hosts. > The level of debug info that generates is so enourmous that you'

Re: [openstack-dev] Novnc switch to sockjs-client instead of websockify

On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 02:33:09PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if it would be possible for NoVNC to switch from > websockify to sockjs-client, which is available here: > > https://github.com/sockjs/sockjs-client > > This has the advantage of not using flash at all (pur

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Default ephemeral filesystem

On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 09:21:54AM +1300, Robert Collins wrote: > The default ephemeral filesystem in Nova is ext3 (for Linux). However > ext3 is IMNSHO a pretty poor choice given ext4's existence. I can > totally accept that other fs's like xfs might be contentious - but is > there any reason not

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:56:47PM +0400, Oleg Gelbukh wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm sorry for being late to the thread, but what about baremetal driver? > Should it support the get_diagnostics() as well? Of course, where practical, every driver should aim to support every method in the virt driv

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 08:02:16AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: > > > On 12/19/13 5:50 PM, "Daniel P. Berrange" wrote: > > >On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 04:28:30AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: > >> Hi, > >> Following the discussion yesterday I have

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 04:28:30AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: > Hi, > Following the discussion yesterday I have updated the wiki - please see > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova_VM_Diagnostics. The proposal is > backwards compatible and will hopefully provide us with the tools to be > able to tro

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 03:47:30PM +0100, Vladik Romanovsky wrote: > I think it was: > > ceilometer sample-list -m cpu_util -q 'resource_id=vm_uuid' Hmm, a standard devstack deployment of ceilometer doesn't seem to record any performance stats at all - just shows me the static configuration param

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 02:27:40PM +, John Garbutt wrote: > On 16 December 2013 15:50, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 03:37:39PM +, John Garbutt wrote: > >> On 16 December 2013 15:25, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >> > On Mon, Dec 16,

Re: [openstack-dev] Diversity as a requirement for incubation

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:57:27PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:40:21AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> I guess there are 3 options: > >> > >> 1. Require diversity for incubation, but find ways to

Re: [openstack-dev] Diversity as a requirement for incubation

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:40:21AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > The TC meeting yesterday uncovered an interesting question which, so > far, divided TC members. > > We require that projects have a number of different developers involved > before they apply for incubation, mostly

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Docker] Environment variables

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:04:33PM -0800, Dan Smith wrote: > > eg use a 'env_' prefix for glance image attributes > > > > We've got a couple of cases now where we want to overrides these > > same things on a per-instance basis. Kernel command line args > > is one other example. Other hardware over

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 03:37:39PM +, John Garbutt wrote: > On 16 December 2013 15:25, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 06:58:24AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: > >> I'd like to propose the following for the V3 API (we will not touch V2 >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Docker] Environment variables

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 04:18:52PM +0100, Daniel Kuffner wrote: > Hi Russell, > > You actually propose to extend the whole nova stack to support > environment variables. Would any other driver benefit from this API > extension? > > Is that what you imagine? > nova --env SQL_URL=postgres://user:pa

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 06:58:24AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: > Hi, > At the moment the administrator is able to retrieve diagnostics for a running > VM. Currently the implementation is very loosely defined, that is, each > driver returns whatever they have to return. This is problematic in a numb

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Blueprint: standard specification of guest CPU topology

On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:05:02PM -0800, Vui Chiap Lam wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > I too found the original bp a little hard to follow, so thanks for > writing up the wiki! I see that the wiki is now linked to the BP, > which is great as well. > > The ability to express CPU topology constraints for

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Blueprint: standard specification of guest CPU topology

On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 01:47:31AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: > Hi, > I think that this information should be used as part of the scheduling > decision, that is hosts that are to be selected should be excluded if they > do not have the necessary resources available. It will be interesting to > know

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >