Hi,
A big thank you to jogo who has done a great job writing up plans for
kilo blueprints and specs:
1) Allow more code that doesn't need a blueprint and spec:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116699/3
Specs are a heavy process, so hopefully this will strike a better
balance between process and
On 25 September 2014 11:44, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
To use the runway system, we need to have a frequently updated list
of blueprints which are a priority to review / merge. Once we have
such a list, IMHO, adding the fixed runway slots around that does
not do anything
On 25 September 2014 14:10, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
The proposal is to keep kilo-1, kilo-2 much the same as juno. Except,
we work harder on getting people to buy into the priorities that are
set, and actively provoke more debate on their correctness, and we
reduce the bar
On 4 September 2014 23:48, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 06:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Position statement
==
Over the past year I've increasingly come to the conclusion that
Nova is heading for (or probably already at) a major crisis. If
steps
On 5 September 2014 00:26, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a
side effect of our effort to split out the scheduler will help but
not solve this problem).
The difference
but just didn't quite make it through in time. So they shouldn't put any
load on reviewers.
Sponsoring cores:
Kenichi Ohmichi
John Garbutt
Me
Yeah, I am happy to support this work.
Thanks
Ken'ichi Ohmichi
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack
Yeah, I have been reviewing these, so happy to sponsor them too.
Patches have been re-approved.
Thanks,
John
On 5 September 2014 00:23, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
So, that's your three. This exception is approved.
Michael
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Nikola Đipanov
Hi,
We have now tagged juno-3, so we are good to approve patches for FFE now.
Given how much there is to get through the gate, it would be nice to
concentrate on FFE code, and higher priority bugs, till we break the
back of those merges.
Thanks,
John
Blueprint re-approved, code re-approved.
Thanks,
John
On 4 September 2014 21:11, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
I'll be the third core here. Approved.
@John: can you please remove your -2 from this one?
Michael
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On
In the nova-meeting we agreed this gets a FFE, based on previous
agreements in nova-meetings.
Blueprint is approved for juno-rc1.
Thanks,
John
On 4 September 2014 16:38, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 05:16 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
The main sr-iov patches have gone
On 3 September 2014 21:57, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey
The libvirt version_cap debacle continues to come up in conversation and
one perception of the whole thing appears to be:
A controversial patch
On 2 September 2014 19:16, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Thierry's recent
email. I'd like to outline the process for requesting a freeze
exception:
* your code must already be up for review
* your blueprint must have an
On 2 September 2014 21:36, Dan Genin daniel.ge...@jhuapl.edu wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what is the rational behind upping the number of core
sponsors for feature freeze exception to 3 if only two +2 are required to
merge? In Icehouse, IIRC, two core sponsors was deemed sufficient.
We tried
Sorry for another top post, but I like how Nikola has pulled this
problem apart, and wanted to respond directly to his response.
On 3 September 2014 10:50, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
The reason many features including my own may not make the FF is not
because there was not enough
patches. I made a note of who had approved them:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109754/
Brian Elliott +2
John Garbutt +2 +A
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109755/
Daniel Berrange +2
Andrew Laski +2
John Garbutt +2 +A
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114817/
Brian Elliott +2
Andrew
Going a bit further up the thread where we are still talking about
spec reviews and not code reviews...
On 28 August 2014 21:42, Dugger, Donald D donald.d.dug...@intel.com wrote:
I would contend that that right there is an indication that there's a problem
with the process.
We got two
On 28 August 2014 21:58, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
On 08/28/2014 02:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
The overall scheduler-lib Blueprint is marked with a high priority
at http://status.openstack.org/release/;. Hopefully that would
I think this is now more about code reviews, but this is important...
On 29 August 2014 10:30, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:07:33AM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Joe Gordon wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
On 28 August 2014 09:50, Markus Zoeller mzoel...@de.ibm.com wrote:
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote on 08/27/2014 08:57:08 PM:
From: Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: 08/27/2014 08:59 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] refactoring of
On 28 August 2014 23:53, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
We just finished discussing when to open up Kilo specs at the nova meeting
today [0], and Kilo specs will open right after we cut Juno RC1 (around Sept
25th [1]). Additionally, the spec template will most likely be revised.
We
On 18 August 2014 11:18, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 13, 2014, at 4:42 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
Let me try to say it another way. You seemed to say that it wasn't much
to ask given the rate at which things happen in OpenStack. I
On 6 August 2014 18:54, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
So, Liyi Meng has an interesting patch up for Nova:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/104876
1) We should just deprecate both the options, with a note in the option help
text that these options are not used when volume size is not 0,
OK, I think this is important as well, so thats 2-3 cores signed up.
Lets assume the exception is granted I guess, or at least, lets clear
it up in the nova-meeting.
Thanks,
John
On 24 July 2014 14:20, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
According to:
On 19 July 2014 03:53, Johannes Erdfelt johan...@erdfelt.com wrote:
I'm requestion a spec freeze exception for online schema changes.
https://review.openstack.org/102545
This work is being done to try to minimize the downtime as part of
upgrades. Database migrations have historically been a
On 19 July 2014 00:56, Alessandro Pilotti
apilo...@cloudbasesolutions.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I’d like to propose the following driver feature parity blueprint spec for an
expection:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105042
This blueprint introduces rescue instance support in the Nova
On 18 July 2014 09:10, Sylvain Bauza sba...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi team,
I would like to put your attention on https://review.openstack.org/89893
This spec targets to isolate access within the filters to only Scheduler
bits. This one is a prerequisite for a possible split of the scheduler
into
On 18 July 2014 14:28, Andrew Laski andrew.la...@rackspace.com wrote:
Hello everybody,
I would like to request a spec proposal extension for instance tasks,
described in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/86938/ . This has been a long
discussed and awaited feature with a lot of support from
On 16 July 2014 14:07, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:57:33AM +, Tim Bell wrote:
It seems a pity to archive the comments and reviewer lists along
with losing a place to continue the discussions even if we are not
expecting
On 12 July 2014 05:07, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/11/2014 07:14 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
While I am not against moving the resource tracker, I feel we could
move this to Gantt after the core scheduling has been moved.
Big -1 from me on this, John.
Frankly, I see no urgency
On 10 July 2014 16:59, Sylvain Bauza sba...@redhat.com wrote:
Le 10/07/2014 15:47, Russell Bryant a écrit :
On 07/10/2014 05:06 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Hi all,
===
tl;dr: Now that we agree on waiting for the split prereqs to be done, we
debate on if ResourceTracker should be part of the
On 10 July 2014 16:52, Matthew Booth mbo...@redhat.com wrote:
Currently we create a rescue instance by creating a new VM with the
original instance's image, then adding the original instance's first
disk to it, and booting. This means we have 2 VMs, which we need to be
careful of when cleaning
Hi,
As announced:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-June/038475.html
The nova-specs dates:
* all juno nova-specs ready for review by the end of today, 3rd July
(in local time for you)
* all blueprints we can take for juno (yes juno-2 and juno-3) approved
by 10th July
We
Thanks all, I think we made a real dent in the review queue yesterday.
On 25 June 2014 22:58, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
The majority of specs are waiting on an update from the submitter. I
didn't grab these stats before today, but I believe we made some good
progress.
Using: $
So just to keep the ML up with some of the discussion we had in IRC
the other day...
Most resources in Nova are owned by a particular nova-compute. So the
locks on the resources are effectively held by the nova-compute that
owns the resource.
We already effectively have a cross nova-compute lock
Seems like we all agree on the basic idea here, which is great.
I think just not concentrating on nova-spec reviews is fine, at least,
it is the simplest way to implement the freeze (as Russell pointed
out).
I so worry about setting the right expectations for the poor souls
who's specs might
As previously (quietly) announced, today we are trying to do a push on
nova-specs reviews.
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova-specs,n,z
The hope is we get through some of the backlog, with some interactive
chat on IRC in #openstack-nova
If someone has better
On 24 June 2014 16:40, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/24/2014 07:32 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:55:41AM +, Day, Phil wrote:
-Original Message-
From: John Garbutt [mailto:j...@johngarbutt.com]
Sent: 23 June 2014 10:35
To: OpenStack
On 18 June 2014 21:57, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/17/2014 05:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
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
On 12 June 2014 17:10, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 06/12/2014 12:02 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 6/12/2014 10:51 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:41:19AM +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote:
I
On 06/14/2014 12:40 AM, Michael Still wrote:
Greetings,
I would like to nominate Ken'ichi Ohmichi for the nova-core team.
Ken'ichi has been involved with nova for a long time now. His reviews
on API changes are excellent, and he's been part of the team that has
driven the new API work
On 14 June 2014 00:48, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at
So I am +1 deprecating resize down, mostly for consistency reasons.
On 16 June 2014 10:34, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
Beyond what is and isn’t technically possible at the file system level there
is always the problem that the user may have more data than can fit into the
reduced disk.
I have seem some work and specs around this here:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/hot-resize
Hope that helps,
John
On 8 April 2014 17:45, Trump.Zhang zhangleiqi...@gmail.com wrote:
Such as QoS attributes of vCPU, Memory and Disk, including IOPS limit,
Bandwidth limit, etc.
On 11 June 2014 20:07, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 6/11/2014 10:01 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
Thanks for bringing this to the list Matt, comments inline ...
tl;dr: some pervasive changes were made
We have stopped reviewing specs (at least that was the plan), to get
Juno-1 out the door before Thursday.
Hopefully on Friday, it will be full steam ahead with nova-specs reviews.
John
On 10 June 2014 09:44, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
Hi,
Any chance of getting a review on
On 3 June 2014 14:29, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
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.
+1
I hope to see us
Hey,
-2 has been removed, feel free to ping me in IRC if you need quicker
turn around, been traveling last few days.
Thanks,
John
On 27 May 2014 19:21, Robert Li (baoli) ba...@cisco.com wrote:
Hi John,
Now that we have agreement during the summit on how to proceed in order to
get it in to
On 28 April 2014 13:30, Jiangying (Jenny) jenny.jiangy...@huawei.com wrote:
Nova now can detect host unreachable. But it fails to make out host
isolation, host dead and nova compute service down. When host unreachable is
reported, users have to find out the exact state by himself and then take
Hi.
I would like to announce my TC candidacy.
I work full time as a Software Developer on OpenStack at Rackspace,
part of the team working on Rackspace Cloud Servers, Rackspace's
public cloud. I am a Nova core reviewer, a member of nova-drivers,
leader of the XenAPI Nova sub-team, and the Nova
I think writing this up as a nova-spec is going to make this process
much easier:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints#Nova
It will save you having to re-write your document once you want to
submit a blueprint, and we can all see each others comments in gerrit,
and more clearly see how
Apologies, that came out all wrong...
On 10 April 2014 09:28, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
I think writing this up as a nova-spec is going to make this process
much easier:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints#Nova
It will save you having to re-write your document once you
On 31 March 2014 10:11, Jay Lau jay.lau@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Currently with VMWare VCDriver, one nova compute can manage multiple
clusters/RPs, this caused cluster admin cannot do live migration between
clusters/PRs if those clusters/PRs managed by one nova compute as the
current live
/HypervisorSupportMatrix
This will have worked if people understand how best to responsibly
contribute new Nova features, and it is easy for their employers to
understand and support that. In addition, we would have an open
understanding of what parts of Nova are well maintained.
Thanks for reading!
John Garbutt
On 31 March 2014 18:53, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
Hi,
I would like to run for the OpenStack Compute (Nova) PTL position.
I find it really rewarding to help resolve conflict. Gallup says I am
a: Learner, Arranger, Achiever, Relator, Includer. I like to listen to
all sides
Sounds like an extra weighter to try and balance load between your two AZs
might be a nicer way to go.
The easiest way might be via cells, one for each AZ . But not sure we
merged that support yet. But there are patches for that.
John
On 25 Mar 2014 20:53, Sangeeta Singh sin...@yahoo-inc.com
On 15 March 2014 18:39, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm curious why the specified git commit chose to fix the anti-affinity race
condition by aborting the boot and triggering a reschedule.
It seems to me that it would have been more elegant for the scheduler to do
a
On 13 March 2014 10:09, Matthew Booth mbo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/03/14 18:28, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 2/25/2014 6:36 AM, Matthew Booth wrote:
I'm new to Nova. After some frustration with the review process,
specifically in the VMware driver, I decided to try to visualise how the
review
On 10 March 2014 18:54, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
On 03/08/2014 02:23 AM, ChangBo Guo wrote:
Are you using libvirt driver ?
As I remember, the way to check if compute nodes with shared storage
is : create a temporary file from source node , then check the file
On 9 March 2014 16:04, Devananda van der Veen devananda@gmail.com wrote:
With the feature freeze in effect and our driver blocked from the Nova tree
for this release cycle, last week we moved our driver into the Ironic tree
in this patch set:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/78002/
This
On 7 March 2014 20:57, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:51 AM, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for
blueprints not already
On 6 March 2014 13:18, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 10:24 PM, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
On 5 March 2014 03:44, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
But this plan is certainly something I'm happy to support.
One extra thing we need
On 6 March 2014 19:09, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/06/2014 01:05 PM, 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
On 7 March 2014 19:50, Tim Bell tim.b...@cern.ch wrote:
The recent operator gathering
(https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/operators-feedback-mar14) concluded a
similar proposal, based on Blueprint-on-Blueprints (BoB for short).
The aim was that operators of production OpenStack clouds should
On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for
blueprints not already merged will need a feature freeze exception (FFE)
to be considered for Icehouse.
In addition to evaluation the request in terms of risks and
On 6 March 2014 10:51, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for
blueprints not already merged will need a feature freeze exception (FFE)
to be considered
On 5 March 2014 03:44, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
But this plan is certainly something I'm happy to support.
+1
On 5 March 2014 03:44, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
So I think this a good compromise to keep things moving. Some aspects
that we'll need to consider:
On 6 March 2014 11:31, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 03/06/2014 05:51 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for
blueprints not already merged will need a feature freeze
/63084/ and
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/77965/
Sponsors: John Garbutt and Nikola Dipanov
One of the things that we are planning on improving in Juno is the way
that the Vmops code is arranged and organized. We will soon be posting a
wiki for ideas to be discussed. That will enable use
On 6 March 2014 08:50, zhangyu (AI) zhangy...@huawei.com wrote:
It seems to be an interesting idea. In fact, a China-based public IaaS,
QingCloud, has provided a similar feature
to their virtual servers. Within 2 hours after a virtual server is deleted,
the server owner can decide whether
complete (using select
destination instead of run_instance), the DB calls locking all the
eventlet threads seems like the biggest issue.
Anyways, looking forward to a good discussion at the summit.
John
Regards,
David Peraza
-Original Message-
From: John Garbutt [mailto:j
On 25 February 2014 15:44, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
On 02/25/2014 05:15 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
On 24 February 2014 22:14, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com
wrote:
What happens if we have a shared-storage instance that we try to migrate
and
fail and end up
On 24 February 2014 18:11, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 2/24/2014 10:13 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 02/24/2014 01:50 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Hi,
There has recently been some speculation around the V3 API and whether
we should go forward with it or instead
On 25 February 2014 06:11, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:37:04 -0800
Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote:
onSharedStorage = True
on_shared_storage = False
This is a good example. I'm not sure it's worth breaking users _or_
introducing a new microversion
On 25 February 2014 09:44, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 21:15:30 -0500
Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
CC'ing the openstack-operators mailing list to get a wider set of
feedback on this question.
On 02/24/2014 05:26 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
1)
On 25 February 2014 09:27, Qin Zhao chaoc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
One simple question about VCenter driver. I feel the VM snapshot function of
VCenter is very useful and is loved by VCenter users. Does anybody think
about to let VCenter driver support it?
It depends if that can be modelled
to conductor work should certainly stop the scheduler making
those pesky DB calls to update the nova instance. And then,
improvements like no-db-scheduler and improvements to scheduling
algorithms should shine through much more.
Thanks,
John
-Original Message-
From: John Garbutt [mailto:j
On 25 February 2014 02:35, Tracy Jones tjo...@vmware.com wrote:
Hi all - i have set up the nova bug scrub meeting for Wednesdays at 1630 UTC
in the #openstack-meeting-3 IRC channel
The first meeting will be all about triaging the 117 un-triaged bugs (here).
Thanks for setting this up.
I
On 24 February 2014 22:14, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
I'm looking at the live migration rollback code and I'm a bit confused.
When setting up a live migration we unconditionally run
ComputeManager.pre_live_migration() on the destination host to do various
things
On 24 February 2014 16:24, David Peraza david_per...@persistentsys.com wrote:
Hello all,
I have been trying some new ideas on scheduler and I think I'm reaching a
resource issue. I'm running 6 compute service right on my 4 CPU 4 Gig VM,
and I started to get some memory allocation issues.
On 20 February 2014 14:55, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 08:22:57 -0500
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
We're also duplicating a lot of test and review energy in having 2 API
stacks. Even before v3 has come out of experimental it's consumed a
huge amount of
Hi,
Lets keep track of things for Nova here:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-icehouse-blueprint-cull
In a few hours I will start reviewing all the blueprints that are not
Needs Code Review and pushing them into next. Anything with some
live code will probably go into Juno-1, if that makes
:
On 02/04/2014 05:10 PM, John Garbutt wrote:
Hi,
Now that we getting close towards the end of Icehouse, it seems a good
time to make sure we tame the un-triaged bug backlog (try say that
really quickly a few times over), and look at what really needs fixing
before Icehouse is released.
I propose
, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
Just a quick reminder, its bug day!
Lets collaborate in #openstack-nova
We can track progress here:
http://webnumbr.com/untouched-nova-bugs
And later progress:
http://status.openstack.org/bugday
Get those bugs tagged:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova
On 4 February 2014 19:16, Jonathan Proulx j...@jonproulx.com wrote:
HI all,
Trying to get a little love on bug
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1227836
Short version is the instance migrates, but there's an RPC time out
that keeps nova thinking it's still on the old node mid-migration.
Hi,
Now that we getting close towards the end of Icehouse, it seems a good
time to make sure we tame the un-triaged bug backlog (try say that
really quickly a few times over), and look at what really needs fixing
before Icehouse is released.
I propose that we have a bug triage day this Friday,
On 27 January 2014 14:52, Justin Santa Barbara jus...@fathomdb.com wrote:
Day, Phil wrote:
We already have a mechanism now where an instance can push metadata as
a way of Windows instances sharing their passwords - so maybe this
could
build on that somehow - for example each instance
On 27 January 2014 10:10, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
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
berra...@redhat.comwrote:
Periodically I've seen people submit big coding style cleanups to Nova
code.
On 27 January 2014 21:36, Ian Wells ijw.ubu...@cack.org.uk wrote:
Live migration for the first release is intended to be covered by macvtap,
in my mind - direct mapped devices have limited support in hypervisors aiui.
It seemed we had a working theory for that, which we test out and see if
On 26 January 2014 09:23, 黎林果 lilinguo8...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I have started the implementation, Please review. Address:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/67067/
Thanks.
Regards,
Lee
Hi lee,
I have added the same comments as Christopher to the blueprint.
Please look at updating the
On 24 January 2014 17:05, Jon Bernard jbern...@tuxion.com wrote:
* Vishvananda Ishaya vishvana...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 16, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Jon Bernard jbern...@tuxion.com wrote:
* Vishvananda Ishaya vishvana...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 14, 2014, at 2:10 PM, Jon Bernard
Apologies for this top post, I just want to move this discussion towards action.
I am traveling next week so it is unlikely that I can make the meetings. Sorry.
Can we please agree on some concrete actions, and who will do the coding?
This also means raising new blueprints for each item of work.
On 8 January 2014 12:07, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
Hi,
Patch sets that are cascaded has have the following errors:
Database migration testing failed either due to migrations unable to be
applied correctly or taking too long.
This change was unable to be automatically merged with
On 8 January 2014 15:29, Jay Lau jay.lau@gmail.com wrote:
2014/1/8 John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com
On 8 January 2014 10:02, David Xie david.script...@gmail.com wrote:
In nova/compute/api.py#2289, function resize, there's a parameter named
flavor_id, if it is None, it is considered
On 8 January 2014 10:02, David Xie david.script...@gmail.com wrote:
In nova/compute/api.py#2289, function resize, there's a parameter named
flavor_id, if it is None, it is considered as cold migration. Thus, nova
should skip resize verifying. However, it doesn't.
Like Jay said, we should skip
On 25 December 2013 05:14, Qixiaozhen qixiaoz...@huawei.com wrote:
Hi,all
A blueprint is registered that is about shrinking the volume in thin
provision.
Have you got the link?
Thin provision means allocating the disk space once the instance writes the
data on the area of volume in the
On 22 December 2013 12:07, Irena Berezovsky ire...@mellanox.com wrote:
Hi Ian,
My comments are inline
I would like to suggest to focus the next PCI-pass though IRC meeting on:
1.Closing the administration and tenant that powers the VM use
cases.
2. Decouple the nova and
Apologies for being late onto this thread, and not making the meeting
the other day.
Also apologies this is almost totally a top post.
On 17 December 2013 15:09, Ian Wells ijw.ubu...@cack.org.uk wrote:
Firstly, I disagree that
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PCI_passthrough_SRIOV_support is an
+1 to 14:00 meeting, I can always make those.
I can probably make some of the 21:00 meetings
But probably only in the summer when its UTC+1 over here.
John
On 19 December 2013 07:49, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
+1, I would make the 14:00 meeting. I often have good intention of making the
On 19 December 2013 12:21, Ian Wells ijw.ubu...@cack.org.uk wrote:
John:
At a high level:
Neutron:
* user wants to connect to a particular neutron network
* user wants a super-fast SRIOV connection
Administration:
* needs to map PCI device to what neutron network the connect to
The
On 19 December 2013 12:54, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
On 19 December 2013 12:21, Ian Wells ijw.ubu...@cack.org.uk wrote:
John:
At a high level:
Neutron:
* user wants to connect to a particular neutron network
* user wants a super-fast SRIOV connection
Administration
301 - 400 of 446 matches
Mail list logo
