Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Why don't we unbind ports or terminate volume connections on shelve offload?

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > This came up in the nova/cinder meeting today, but I can't for the life > of me think of why we don't unbind ports or terminate the connection > volumes when we shelve offload an instance from a compute host. > > When you unshelve, if

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Stepping back

I should have sent this weeks ago but I'm a bad person who forgets common courtesy. My employment situation has changed in a way that does not afford me the necessary time to remain a regular contributor to Nova, or the broader OpenStack community. So it is with regret that I announce that I will

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova]Question about unit tests for shelve/unshleve

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016, at 07:11 AM, Rikimaru Honjo wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a question about unit tests of nova. > (I found this question when I fixed a bug about shelve.[1]) > > "nova.tests.unit.compute.test_shelve.ShelveComputeAPITestCase" has > test cases for

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Why do we have project specific hacking rules?

On Sun, Oct 2, 2016, at 11:02 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 10/2/2016 5:47 AM, Amrith Kumar wrote: > > It was my understanding that hacking rules were like the 'Ten > > Commandments', the 'Four Opens'; things that were universally true across > > all projects and an attempt to bring

Re: [openstack-dev] os-loganalyze, project log parsing, or ...

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016, at 07:15 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/27/2016 06:19 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > I totally understand where you're coming from. I just see it > > differently. > > > > The way it was done did not affect any other projects, an

Re: [openstack-dev] os-loganalyze, project log parsing, or ...

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 05:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/27/2016 05:45 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 04:43 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > > >>>> > >>>> I definitely can see the value in having

Re: [openstack-dev] os-loganalyze, project log parsing, or ...

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 04:43 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > > > > > I definitely can see the value in having machine parsable log stats in > > > our > > > artifacts, but I'm not sure where project specific pieces would come > > > from. But, > > > given that hypothetical I would say as long

Re: [openstack-dev] os-loganalyze, project log parsing, or ...

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 02:40 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 01:03:35PM -0400, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 12:39 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:36:07AM -0400, Andrew

Re: [openstack-dev] os-loganalyze, project log parsing, or ...

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 12:39 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:36:07AM -0400, Andrew Laski wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > Recently I noticed that people would look at logs from a Zuul née > > Jenkins CI run and comment something like "th

Re: [openstack-dev] os-loganalyze, project log parsing, or ...

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > Recently I noticed that people would look at logs from a Zuul née > > Jenkins CI run and comment some

[openstack-dev] os-loganalyze, project log parsing, or ...

Hello all, Recently I noticed that people would look at logs from a Zuul née Jenkins CI run and comment something like "there seem to be more warnings in here than usual." And so I thought it might be nice to quantify that sort of thing so we didn't have to rely on gut feelings. So I threw

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][nova] Centralizing policy (was: Anyone interested in writing a policy generator sphinx extension?)

y static data, and on the occasions that it needs to change it can be updated with a configuration management solution and the live policy reloading that oslo.policy has. > > > On 21.09.2016 20:16, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Joshua Harlow wr

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][nova] Anyone interested in writing a policy generator sphinx extension?

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 04:18 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 03:18 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > >> Andrew Laski wrote: > >>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > >>>> Andrew L

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][nova] Anyone interested in writing a policy generator sphinx extension?

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 03:18 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > >> Andrew Laski wrote: > >>> However, I have asked twice now on the review what the benefit of doing > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][nova] Anyone interested in writing a policy generator sphinx extension?

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > Andrew Laski wrote: > > However, I have asked twice now on the review what the benefit of doing > > this is and haven't received a response so I'll ask here. The proposal > > would add additional latency to nearl

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][nova] Anyone interested in writing a policy generator sphinx extension?

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Alexander Makarov wrote: > What if policy will be manageable using RESTful API? > I'd like to validate the idea to handle policies in keystone or > affiliated service: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/325326/ As Matt said, that's unrelated to what he's asking

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] ops meetup feedback

Excellent writeup, thanks. Some comments inline. On Tue, Sep 20, 2016, at 09:20 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > > > Performance Bottlenecks > --- > > * scheduling issues with Ironic - (this is a bug we got through during > the week after the session) > * live snapshots actually

[openstack-dev] [Nova] No cellsv2 meeting today

Since we're closing in on RC1 which needs peoples attention and nothing cells related affects that we're going to skip the cells meeting today. The next planned meeting is September 28th at 1700UTC. Thanks. -Andrew __

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

nt that does that, but there are many users out there who do not use something like openstackclient, for various reasons. > > Thanks, > Kevin > ________ > From: Andrew Laski [and...@lascii.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 4:34 PM > To:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 07:18 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/07/2016 07:34 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 06:54 PM, Martin Millnert wrote: > >> On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 09:34 +1200, Adrian Turjak wrote: > >> 3) core functional

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

library api api? (yes, double apis) Where you >> > can build up an api using other api calls and users can rely on >> > those standard overarching api's to be there? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Kevin >> > __

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 06:33 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: > Heat is a bit of overkill for something as tiny as this. I agree. And though it's been a while since I've looked at Heat I didn't get the impression that it was designed for this sort of usage: a simple API call that orchestrates

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 06:54 PM, Martin Millnert wrote: > On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 09:34 +1200, Adrian Turjak wrote: > > This is exactly what something like Minstral would be fantastic for. > > Multi-project workflow. > > Rather than try and build logic like this directly into nova, looks > > at

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 04:31 AM, Martin Millnert wrote: > Hi Matt, > > On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 16:39 -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > Floating IPs aren't required in OpenStack deployments, and anyone  > > running with cells v1 (Rackspace, GoDaddy, NeCTAR, CERN) doesn't use > > or  > > support

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Add support for tag instances when booting

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 05:15 AM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote: > Hi All, > > Tags for servers are supported in microversion 2.26, but currently we > can only add tags to > instances that are already existed in the cloud, that is, we can not > set tags to instances > when we boot the instances. User will

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][massively distributed][architecture]Coordination between actions/WGs

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016, at 09:55 AM, lebre.adr...@free.fr wrote: > > > - Mail original - > > De: "Andrew Laski" <and...@lascii.com> > > À: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > Envoyé: Mardi 30 Août 2016 15:03:35 > > Objet: Re:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][massively distributed][architecture]Coordination between actions/WGs

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016, at 05:36 AM, lebre.adr...@free.fr wrote: > Dear all > > Sorry my lack of reactivity, I 've been out for the few last days. > > According to the different replies, I think we should enlarge the > discussion and not stay on the vCPE use-case, which is clearly specific >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Support specified volume_type when boot instance, do we like it?

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016, at 09:06 AM, Jordan Pittier wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Zhenyu Zheng > wrote: >> Hi, all >> >> Currently we have customer demands about adding parameter >> "volume_type" to --block-device to provide the support of specified >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Reconciling flavors and block device mappings

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016, at 08:42 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > > Le 29/08/2016 14:20, Jay Pipes a écrit : > > On 08/29/2016 05:11 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > >> Le 29/08/2016 13:25, Jay Pipes a écrit : > >>> On 08/26/2016 09:20 AM, Ed Leafe wrote: > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Reconciling flavors and block device mappings

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016, at 07:25 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 08/26/2016 09:20 AM, Ed Leafe wrote: > > On Aug 25, 2016, at 3:19 PM, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote: > > > >> One other thing to note is that while a flavor constrains how much local > >> di

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Reconciling flavors and block device mappings

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016, at 08:20 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 08/29/2016 05:11 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > Le 29/08/2016 13:25, Jay Pipes a écrit : > >> On 08/26/2016 09:20 AM, Ed Leafe wrote: > >>> On Aug 25, 2016, at 3:19 PM, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [Nova] Reconciling flavors and block device mappings

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016, at 11:01 AM, John Griffith wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Andrew Laski > <and...@lascii.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016, at 03:44 >> AM,kostiantyn.volenbovs...@swisscom.com >> wrote: >> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [Nova] Reconciling flavors and block device mappings

complex use cases. But it's an option. > > BR, > Konstantin > > > -Original Message- > > From: Andrew Laski [mailto:and...@lascii.com] > > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 10:20 PM > > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > Cc: openstack-operat...@l

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM console for VMware instances

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016, at 04:16 AM, Radoslav Gerganov wrote: > On 25.08.2016 18:25, Andrew Laski wrote: > > Is there a reason this has not been proposed to the Nova project, or > > have I missed that? I looked for a proposal and did not see one. > > > > The main

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Reconciling flavors and block device mappings

Cross posting to gather some operator feedback. There have been a couple of contentious patches gathering attention recently about how to handle the case where a block device mapping supersedes flavor information. Before moving forward on either of those I think we should have a discussion about

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][API] Need naming suggestions for "capabilities"

> > >> On Aug 16, 2016, at 3:16 AM, Sylvain Bauza <sba...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Le 15/08/2016 22:59, Andrew Laski a écrit : >> >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: >>> >>>> On 08/15/2016 09:27 AM, A

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM console for VMware instances

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016, at 09:50 AM, Radoslav Gerganov wrote: > Hi, > > If you want to use the MKS console for VMware instances, it's now > possible with the nova-mksproxy[1]. > There is a devstack plugin, so simply add this in your local.conf: > > [[local|localrc]] > enable_plugin

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][API] Need naming suggestions for "capabilities"

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 08/15/2016 09:27 AM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > Currently in Nova we're discussion adding a "capabilities" API to expose > > to users what actions they're allowed to take, and having compute hosts > >

[openstack-dev] [Nova][API] Need naming suggestions for "capabilities"

Currently in Nova we're discussion adding a "capabilities" API to expose to users what actions they're allowed to take, and having compute hosts expose "capabilities" for use by the scheduler. As much fun as it would be to have the same term mean two very different things in Nova to retain some

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Possible REST API design change for get-me-a-network (2.37)

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016, at 06:54 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 08/11/2016 03:53 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > I wanted to bring this up for awareness since we're getting close to feature > > freeze and want consensus before it gets too late. > > > > Ken'ichi brought up a good question on my REST

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Some thoughts on API microversions

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016, at 11:40 AM, John Garbutt wrote: > On 4 August 2016 at 16:28, Edward Leafe <e...@leafe.com> wrote: > > On Aug 4, 2016, at 8:18 AM, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote: > > > >> This gets to the point I'm trying to make. We don't guar

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Some thoughts on API microversions

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016, at 08:20 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/03/2016 08:54 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > I've brought some of these thoughts up a few times in conversations > > where the Nova team is trying to decide if a particular change warrants > > a microversion. I'm s

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Some thoughts on API microversions

I've brought some of these thoughts up a few times in conversations where the Nova team is trying to decide if a particular change warrants a microversion. I'm sure I've annoyed some people by this point because it wasn't germane to those discussions. So I'll lay this out in it's own thread. I am

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Does this api modification need Microversion?

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016, at 02:24 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 08/03/2016 10:53 AM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > I think the discussion about whether or not this needs a microversion is > > missing > > the bigger question of whether or not this should be in the API to begin &

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Does this api modification need Microversion?

I think the discussion about whether or not this needs a microversion is missing the bigger question of whether or not this should be in the API to begin with. If it's safe to rollback from this error state why not just do that automatically in Nova? If it's proposed for the API because it's not

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [RFC] ResourceProviderTags - Manage Capabilities with ResourceProvider

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016, at 08:08 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 07/31/2016 10:03 PM, Alex Xu wrote: > > 2016-07-28 22:31 GMT+08:00 Jay Pipes > >: > > > > On 07/20/2016 11:25 PM, Alex Xu wrote: > > > > One more for end users: Capabilities

[openstack-dev] [Nova] No cellsv2 meeting this week

Since the majority of us met in person last week and there doesn't seem to be anything that needs discussion right now I am not planning to have a meeting this week. In it's place please feel free to do some reviews :)__

[openstack-dev] [Nova] policy in code update

Here's a quick update on where we have ended up so far on the work to define default policy rules in Nova code. The majority of the effort has merged so now all used policy checks are defined in code, thanks Claudiu for doing most of this work. The sample policy file is now empty

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Plugins for all

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016, at 03:21 PM, Hayes, Graham wrote: > I just proposed a review to openstack/governance repo [0] that aims > to have everything across OpenStack be plugin based for all cross > project interaction, or allow all projects access to the same internal > APIs and I wanted to give a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Questions about instance actions' update and finish

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016, at 11:11 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 6/29/2016 10:10 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > On 6/29/2016 6:40 AM, Andrew Laski wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016, at 09:27 PM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote: > >>> How abou

[openstack-dev] [Nova] No cells meeting today

Sorry for the late notice but based on an informal poll of the usual attendees due to the impending feature freeze everyone is busy with other things, and there wouldn't be much of anything to discuss this week. We will resume next week at the normal time.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Questions about instance actions' update and finish

is complete. Sounds good to me. > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Andrew Laski > <and...@lascii.com> wrote: >> __ >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016, at 03:26 AM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do we require the 'next' link for paging, always?

.py#L5976 > > > But the question for keypairs and hypervisors, looks like they > > didn't specify the sort order explicitly, so I think they should depend > > on the DB implementation. Should we keep the old version API unspecified > > sort order? > > I think A

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Questions about instance actions' update and finish

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016, at 03:26 AM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm working on add pagination and timestamp filter for os-instance- > actions API: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326326/ > As Alex_xu pointed out that it will be better to filter by > `updated_at` for timestamp filter

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][pbr][packaging][all] Definition of Data Files (config) in setup.cfg

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016, at 05:36 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Sun, Jun 12 2016, Monty Taylor wrote: > > > I will call hogwash on that. That we install files such as that which > > are actually code has been a deployer nightmare since day one, and the > > solution is not to make pip smarter, it's

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Question about redundant API samples tests for microversions

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016, at 04:16 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > I was reviewing this today: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326940/ > > And I said to myself, 'self, do we really need to subclass the API > samples functional tests for this microversion given this change doesn't > modify the

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] using ironic as a replacement for existing datacenter baremetal provisioning

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016, at 02:34 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > Devananda van der Veen wrote: > > On 06/07/2016 09:55 AM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > >> Joshua Harlow wrote: > >>> Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Joshua Harlow's message of 2016-06-07 08:46:28 -0700: > > Clint Byrum wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] State machines in Nova

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016, at 06:06 AM, Timofei Durakov wrote: > From my sight, I concerned proposed transition from option #1 to > option #2. > because it would be quite big change. So I wonder, has any > component team > implemented such transition. Open questions: > * upgrades story potential

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] State machines in Nova

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016, at 05:51 AM, Miles Gould wrote: > On 31/05/16 21:03, Timofei Durakov wrote: > > there is blueprint[1] that was approved during Liberty and resubmitted > > to Newton(with spec[2]). > > The idea is to define state machines for operations as live-migration, > > resize, etc. and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] State machines in Nova

On Tue, May 31, 2016, at 04:26 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > Timofei Durakov wrote: > > Hi team, > > > > there is blueprint[1] that was approved during Liberty and resubmitted > > to Newton(with spec[2]). > > The idea is to define state machines for operations as live-migration, > > resize, etc.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest][qa][ironic][nova] When Nova should mark instance as successfully deleted?

On Fri, May 27, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 05:52:51PM +0300, Vasyl Saienko wrote: > > Lucas, Andrew > > > > Thanks for fast response. > > > > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest][qa][ironic][nova] When Nova should mark instance as successfully deleted?

On Fri, May 27, 2016, at 09:25 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for bringing this up Vasyl! > > > At the moment Nova with ironic virt_driver consider instance as deleted, > > while on Ironic side server goes to cleaning which can take a while. As > > result current

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] determining or clarifying a path for gabbi+nova

On Wed, May 25, 2016, at 11:13 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > > Earlier this year I worked with jaypipes to compose a spec[1] for using > gabbi[2] with nova. Summit rolled around and there were some legitimate > concerns about the focus of the spec being geared towards replacing the > api sample

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecated options in sample configs?

he other changes I should be aware of. That seems easier to me than aggregating that data myself by checking various sources. Anyways, I have no strong cause for removing the deprecated options. I just wondered if it was a low hanging fruit and thought I would ask. > > On Tue, May 17, 2

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecated options in sample configs?

On Tue, May 17, 2016, at 02:36 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Andrew Laski > <and...@lascii.com> wrote: >> I was in a discussion earlier about discouraging deployers from using >> deprecated options and the question came up about w

[openstack-dev] [all] Deprecated options in sample configs?

I was in a discussion earlier about discouraging deployers from using deprecated options and the question came up about why we put deprecated options into the sample files generated in the various projects. So, why do we do that? I view the sample file as a reference to be used when setting up a

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Distributed Database

On Tue, May 3, 2016, at 08:05 PM, Mark Doffman wrote: > This thread has been a depressing read. > > I understand that the content is supposed to be distributed databases > but for me it has become an inquisition of cellsV2. > > Our question has clearly become "Should we continue efforts on >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Distributed Database

On Mon, May 2, 2016, at 01:13 PM, Edward Leafe wrote: > On May 2, 2016, at 10:51 AM, Mike Bayer wrote: > > >> Concretely, we think that there are three possible approaches: > >> 1) We can use the SQLAlchemy API as the common denominator between a > >> relational and

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Austin summit cells v2 session recap

Thanks for the summary, this is great. Comments inline. On Mon, May 2, 2016, at 09:32 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > Andrew Laski led a double session for cells v2 on Wednesday afternoon. > The full session etherpad is here [1]. > > Andrew started with an overview of what's don

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Distributed Database

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016, at 04:27 PM, Ed Leafe wrote: > OK, so I know that Friday afternoons are usually the worst times to > write a blog post and start an email discussion, and that the Friday > immediately before a Summit is the absolute worst, but I did it anyway. > >

Re: [openstack-dev] Nova quota statistics counting issue

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016, at 12:27 PM, Dmitry Stepanenko wrote: > Hi Team, > I worked on nova quota statistics issue > (https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1284424) happenning when nova-* > processes are restarted during removing instances and was able to > reproduce it. For repro I used

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposing Andrey Kurilin for python-novaclient core

+1 On Wed, Apr 13, 2016, at 01:53 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > I'd like to propose that we make Andrey Kurilin core on > python-novaclient. > > He's been doing a lot of the maintenance the last several months and a > lot of times is the first to jump on any major issue, does a lot of the >

Re: [openstack-dev] [cross-project] [all] Quotas and the need for reservation

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016, at 09:57 AM, Ryan McNair wrote: > >It is believed that reservation help to to reserve a set of resources > >beforehand and hence eventually preventing any other upcoming request > >(serial or parallel) to exceed quota if because of original request the > >project might have

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] API priorities in Newton

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 04:47 PM, Adam Young wrote: > On 03/30/2016 04:16 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 03:54 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > >> > >> On 3/30/2016 2:42 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, M

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] API priorities in Newton

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 03:54 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 3/30/2016 2:42 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 03:26 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> During the Nova API meeting we had some conversations about priorities, >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] API priorities in Newton

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 03:26 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > During the Nova API meeting we had some conversations about priorities, > but this feels like the thing where a mailing list conversation is more > inclusive to get agreement on things. I think we need to remain focused > on what API related

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][nova] Messaging: everything can talk to everything, and that is a bad thing

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016, at 07:00 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > > On Mar 21, 2016, at 9:43 PM, Adam Young wrote: > > > > I had a good discussion with the Nova folks in IRC today. > > > > My goal was to understand what could talk to what, and the short according > > to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][infra] revert new gerrit

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016, at 10:31 AM, Andrey Kurilin wrote: > Hi all! > I want to start this thread because I'm tired. I spent a lot of time, but I > can't review as easy as it was with old interface. New Gerrit is awful. Here > are several issues: > > * It is not possible to review patches

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Standardized executable return codes/logging conventions?

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016, at 06:16 AM, Finucane, Stephen wrote: > I'm working on a fix [1] for bug #1538227, "Failed `nova-manage db > sync` returns exitcode of 0" [2]. Having done this, I've noted that > there seems to be no consistent policy around (a) what return codes to > use (if any), and (b)

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - Changing the Neutron default security group rules

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016, at 02:36 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote: > Clearly, some operators and users disagree with the opinion that 'by > default security groups should closed off' given that we have several > large public providers who have changed these defaults (despite there > being no documented

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Cells meeting cancelled next week

Since we'll be past FF by then work in progress will be slowing down. We will still meet occasionally to discuss specs or prepare for the summit, but not next week. The next meeting will be March 16th at 1700 UTC. __

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova hooks - document & test or deprecate?

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016, at 01:18 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > > Forgive my ignorance or for playing devil's advocate, but wouldn't the > > main difference between notifications and hooks be that notifications > > are asynchronous and hooks aren't? > > The main difference is that notifications are

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova hooks - document & test or deprecate?

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016, at 12:53 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote: > Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016, at 12:12 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > >>> In our continued quest on being more explicit about plug points it feels > >>> like we should other

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova hooks - document & test or deprecate?

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016, at 12:12 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > > In our continued quest on being more explicit about plug points it feels > > like we should other document the interface (which means creating > > stability on the hook parameters) or we should deprecate this construct > > as part of a

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] solving API case sensitivity issues

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016, at 07:48 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > We have a specific bug around aggregrate metadata setting in Nova which > exposes a larger issue with our mysql schema. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1538011 > > On mysql the following will explode with a 500: > > > nova

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 02:42 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 2/22/2016 5:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > > On 02/19/2016 12:49 PM, John Garbutt wrote: > > > >> > >> Consider a user that uses these four clouds: > >> * nova-network flat DHCP > >> * nova-network VLAN manager > >> * neutron with

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Mike Bayer wrote: > > > On 02/22/2016 11:30 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > > On 02/22/2016 11:17 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> We've recently run into some interesting behaviour that I thought I >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 07:07 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > On Mon, 22 Feb 2016, Sean Dague wrote: > > > that being said... I think the behavior of CLI tools should default to > > nic auto being implied. The user experience there is different. You use > > cli tools for one off boots of things, so

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 02/19/2016 09:30 AM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016, at 05:34 PM, melanie witt wrote: > >> On Feb 12, 2016, at 14:49, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> &g

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016, at 05:34 PM, melanie witt wrote: > On Feb 12, 2016, at 14:49, Jay Pipes wrote: > > > This would be my preference as well, even though it's technically a > > backwards-incompatible API change. > > > > The idea behind get-me-a-network was specifically

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Should we signal backwards incompatible changes in microversions?

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 07:54 AM, Alex Xu wrote: > > > 2016-02-16 19:53 GMT+08:00 Sean Dague <s...@dague.net>: >> On 02/12/2016 03:55 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: >> > Starting a new thread to continue a thought that came up in >> > http://lists.openstack.or

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 03:51 PM, Ed Leafe wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 02/12/2016 02:41 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > >> I think if the point of the experience for this API is to be > >> working out > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 01:45 PM, John Garbutt wrote: > On 12 February 2016 at 18:17, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > >> Forgive me for thinking out loud, but I'm trying

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Should we signal backwards incompatible changes in microversions?

Starting a new thread to continue a thought that came up in http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/086457.html. The Nova API microversion framework allows for backwards compatible and backwards incompatible changes but there is no way to programmatically distinguish the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

happen. > > Thanks, > doug > > > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 1:51 PM, Ed Leafe <e...@leafe.com> wrote: > > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA512 > > > > On 02/12/2016 02:41 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > >>> I think if the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 05:29 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: > > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 3:17 PM, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 04:53 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: > >> > >>> On Feb

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 03:11 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 02/12/2016 02:19 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 01:45 PM, John Garbutt wrote: > >> On 12 February 2016 at 18:17, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote: > >>&g

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 04:53 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: > > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 2:15 PM, Andrew Laski <and...@lascii.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016, at 04:03 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: > >> Correct me if I’m wrong, but wit

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][glance][cinder][neutron]How to make use of x-openstack-request-id

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016, at 05:47 AM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 9:56 AM > > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev]

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] do not account compute resource of instances in state SHELVED_OFFLOADED

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016, at 07:46 AM, Christian Berendt wrote: > After offloading a shelved instance the freed compute resources are > still accounted. > > I think it makes sense to make this behavior configurable. We often have > the request to not account the freed compute resources after an

  1   2   3   >