use cases.
Please see my comments inline.
Cool.
Regards,
Irena
-Original Message-
From: John Garbutt [mailto:j...@johngarbutt.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 1:42 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron
On 17 December 2013 12:53, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
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.
On 16 December 2013 15:50, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 03:37:39PM +, John Garbutt wrote:
On 16 December 2013 15:25, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 06:58:24AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote:
I'd like to propose
On 4 December 2013 17:10, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
I think option 3 makes the most sense here (pending anyone saying we
should run away screaming from mox3 for some reason). It's actually
what I had been assuming since this thread a while back.
This means that we don't need
On 16 December 2013 15:25, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
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
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
In particular, has there been a decision made about whether it will
definitely be deprecated in some (as yet unspecified) future release, or
whether it will continue to be supported for the foreseeable future?
We want
On 19 November 2013 11:40, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
I've updated the Nova review check list with some details for reviewing V3
API changesets and started a bit of a style guide for the API.
Checklist:
On 20 November 2013 10:21, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Russell Bryant wrote:
One of the bits of feedback that came from the Nova Project Structure
and Process session at the design summit was that it would be nice to
skip having blueprints for smaller items.
In an effort to
On 20 November 2013 10:19, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:18:24AM +0800, Wangpan wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for your help in advance.
I have read your wiki page and it explains this issue very clearly.
But I have a question about the 'technical
On 13 November 2013 23:22, Andrew Laski andrew.la...@rackspace.com wrote:
On 11/13/13 at 11:12pm, Jiang, Yunhong wrote:
Hi, Dan Smith and all,
I noticed followed statement in 'Icehouse tasks' in
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IcehouseNovaExtensibleSchedulerMetrics
On 11 November 2013 12:04, Alexander Kuznetsov akuznet...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi all,
While studying Hadoop performance in a virtual environment, I found an
interesting problem with Nova scheduling. In OpenStack cluster, we have
overcommit policy, allowing to put on one compute more vms than
Hi,
I am attempting to extract the consensus we reached in all the design
summit sessions here:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IcehouseNovaSummit
Help to verify that I have not miss-represented things would be very
gratefully received.
John
___
I like the idea of a more general config validation phase to help
people when first starting out.
My worry is that it would slow down the starting back up of servers
for people deploying their code using CI, where the have already
verified their configuration. But maybe its so fast I don't care,
On 11 November 2013 10:27, Rosa, Andrea (HP Cloud Services)
andrea.r...@hp.com wrote:
Hi
Generally mock is supposed to be used over mox now for python 3 support.
That is my understanding too
+1
But I don't think we should waste all our time re-writing all our mox
and stub tests. Lets just
Its intentional. Cells is there to split up your nodes into more
manageable chunks.
There are quite a few design summit sessions on looking into
alternative approaches to our current scheduler.
While I would love a single scheduler to make everyone happy, I am
thinking we might end up with
On 31 October 2013 16:57, Johannes Erdfelt johan...@erdfelt.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
So there is a series of patches starting with -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/53417/ that go back and radically
change existing migration files.
I initially agreed
On 29 October 2013 16:11, Eddie Sheffield eddie.sheffi...@rackspace.com wrote:
John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com said:
Going back to Joe's comment:
Can both of these cases be covered by configuring the keystone catalog?
+1
If both v1 and v2 are present, pick v2, otherwise just pick what
On 30 October 2013 01:51, haruka tanizawa harube...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi John!
Thank you for your reply:)
Sorry for inline comment.
We also need something that doesn't clash with the cross-service
request id, as that is doing something slightly different. Would
idempotent-request-id work
On 29 October 2013 20:18, Mike Spreitzer mspre...@us.ibm.com wrote:
John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote on 10/29/2013 07:29:19 AM:
...
Its looking good, but I was thinking about a slightly different approach:
* I would like to see instance groups be used to describe all
scheduler hints
On 28 October 2013 15:39, Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 9:24 AM, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
Here is a really bad attempt at codifying what I think about features vs
bugs:
1) If its a new API call, or a change in behaviour, or a new config
setting
John Garbutt wrote:
On 25 October 2013 11:52, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
I don't have the numbers but I have a feeling that what happened in
Havana was that a lot of blueprints slipped until the time for feature
freeze. Reviewers thought it was a worthwile feature at that point
On 29 October 2013 10:20, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 29 October 2013 23:06, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
Hi Rob,
I think it looks like a good option - but I'd like to see it exposed as
such to the user rather than a change in the default behavior as such. I.e.
I would love to see a symmetry between Cinder local volumes and
Neutron PCI passthrough VIFs.
Not entirely sure I have that clear in my head right now, but I just
wanted to share the idea:
* describe resource external to nova that is attached to VM in the API
(block device mapping and/or vif
On 29 October 2013 06:46, Yathiraj Udupi (yudupi) yud...@cisco.com wrote:
The Instance Group API document is now updated with a simple example request
payload of a nested group, and some description of how the API
implementation should handle the registration of the components of a nested
On 28 October 2013 23:40, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:22 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
As I looked at the havana release notes that talk about the v3 api, and as
I was reviewing
port test_images and test_server_actions into v3 part2
On 25 October 2013 23:23, Chris Behrens cbehr...@codestud.com wrote:
On Oct 25, 2013, at 3:46 AM, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
Hi Folks,
We're very occasionally seeing problems where a thread processing a create
hangs (and we've seen when taking to Cinder and Glance). Whilst those
Going back to Joe's comment:
Can both of these cases be covered by configuring the keystone catalog?
+1
If both v1 and v2 are present, pick v2, otherwise just pick what is in
the catalogue. That seems cool. Not quite sure how the multiple glance
endpoints works in the keystone catalog, but
On 29 October 2013 11:56, haruka tanizawa harube...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Joe!
Thank you for your help.
I wrote BP
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/idempotentcy-client-token again.
Could you review it when you have time.
I like the idea but two comments:
* Can you fill out the
On 25 October 2013 11:52, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 23/10/13 17:33, Russell Bryant wrote:
4) Blueprint Prioritization
I would like to do a better job of using priorities in Icehouse. The
priority field services a couple of purposes:
- helps reviewers prioritize their
On 25 October 2013 10:18, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 24, 2013 9:14 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 24 October 2013 04:33, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings,
At the last Nova meeting we started talking about some updates to the
Hi,
There is some information in the EC2 metadata, or at least I have a
patch up for that:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/46286/
I am raising some ideas to improve things here:
http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/191
John
On 15 October 2013 08:24, Vijay Venkatachalam
To me this sounds like extra docs and bugs, which is exactly what we
need to tidy up before RC.
So I think this should be given an exception.
John
On 6 September 2013 01:31, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'd just like to clarify whether adding api samples for the V3 API
is
+1 I meant to raise that myself when I saw some changes there the other day.
On 4 September 2013 15:52, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Russell Bryant wrote:
On 09/04/2013 10:26 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
Hi all,
As someone who has felt about as much pain as possible from the
multi-nic added an extra virtual interface on a seprate network, like
adding a port:
http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/admin/content/using-multi-nics.html
I think we need to keep a nova-network focused api extension, and a
separate neutron focused api extension, because we have
+1 to Russell's proposal. I came to similar conclusions when looking
at snapshots for the XenAPI NFS driver (seems similar to the qemu NFS
option, except uses VHD not qcow2).
I wondered about, but discarded, the idea about a new cinder-compute
worker on each compute node for all volume operations
On 6 August 2013 23:06, Ian McLeod imcl...@redhat.com wrote:
The proof of concept approach is limited to full-virt hypervisors. It's
unclear to me if there's a way we can make this work for Xen-backed
installs without the kind of lower level access to the virt environment
that we'll get if we
I guess this is the same issue we faced with the capabilities filters
and things, when drivers don't report stats in a consistent format.
If we dictate the driver reports things in a standard format, it will
make our lives much easier, I think.
Currently, some report their own format, and a few
On 3 August 2013 03:07, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
Some people had concerns about exposing the glance api publicly and so
wanted to retain the images support in Nova.
So the consensus seemed to be to leave the images support in, but to demote
it from core. So people who don't
Hi Anne,
On 5 August 2013 15:15, Anne Gentle annegen...@justwriteclick.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:55 AM, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
Given we seem to be leaning towards WSME:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/012954.html
Could we not try
On 1 July 2013 15:49, Andrew Laski andrew.la...@rackspace.com wrote:
On 07/01/13 at 11:23am, Mauro S M Rodrigues wrote:
One more though, about os-multiple-create: I was also thinking to remove
it, I don't see any real advantage to use it since it doesn't offer any kind
of flexibility like
The confirm will happen automatically, after a period of time.
Maybe 0 is a valid option there, I can't remember.
John
On 1 July 2013 03:18, guohliu guoh...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 06/28/2013 05:58 PM, John Garbutt wrote:
I am not sure its worth the extra calls.
Hopefully once we have
Interesting, thanks for trying that. I think this is the time people
feel the most.
It should help set expectations on how long it will take to get your
change into trunk. It seems, on average, to take two weeks.
Hopefully it is useful to spot reviews that are proving tricky to get
in, and they
Don't like dragging up old threads, but I spoke to Navneet on IRC, and
I missed this thread first time.
The Disk_Config setting is used by XenAPI to decide when it should
resize the server's partition and filesystem, but nova currently only
does this root disks that have a single partition where
So in the current review, I have just gone for switching between
2000GB and 1024 GB.
I figure we can try this simpler approach, and worry about
generalizing it if people need it later.
John
On 24 June 2013 16:13, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/21/2013 05:55 AM, John Garbutt
Hi,
I have had some discussions about if I should add a config flag in this change:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/32760/
I am looking to support adding a large amount of ephemeral disk space
to a VM, but the VHD format has a limit of around 2TB per disk. To
work around this in XenServer, I
We spoke about some nice validation frameworks at the summit, and here
and there.
Could we get away with XML-JSON then validate the JSON request (and
assume XML parse error also means bad request)?
John
On 20 June 2013 17:44, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/20/2013 12:00 PM,
401 - 446 of 446 matches
Mail list logo
