Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Rocky PTG summary - miscellaneous topics from Friday

2018-03-20 Thread melanie witt

On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 19:12:58 -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:

    *  XenAPI: support non file system based SR types - e.g. LVM, ISCSI
      * Currently xenapi is only file system-based, cannot yet support
LVM, ISCSI that are supported by XenServer
      * We agreed that a specless blueprint is fine for this:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/xenapi-image-handler-option-improvement  


This blueprint isn't approved yet. Is someone going to bring it up in
the nova meeting, or are we just going to approve since it there was
agreement to do so at the PTG?


I'll bring it up at the next meeting. I've added it to the open 
discussion section of the agenda.


-melanie


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Rocky PTG summary - miscellaneous topics from Friday

2018-03-20 Thread Matt Riedemann

On 3/20/2018 5:57 PM, melanie witt wrote:
     * For rebuild, we're going to defer the instance.save() until 
conductor has passed scheduling and before it casts to compute in order 
to address the issue of rolling back instance values if something fails 
during rebuild scheduling


I got to thinking about why the API does the instance.save() before 
casting to conductor, and realized that if we changed that, the POST 
response for rebuild will be different, because the handler code looks 
up the updated instance from the DB to form the response body. So if we 
move the save() to conductor, the response body will change and that's a 
behavior change, unless there is another way to handle this without 
duplicating a bunch of logic.



   *  XenAPI: support non file system based SR types - e.g. LVM, ISCSI
     * Currently xenapi is only file system-based, cannot yet support 
LVM, ISCSI that are supported by XenServer
     * We agreed that a specless blueprint is fine for this: 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/xenapi-image-handler-option-improvement 



This blueprint isn't approved yet. Is someone going to bring it up in 
the nova meeting, or are we just going to approve since it there was 
agreement to do so at the PTG?



   * Block device mapping creation races during attach volume
     * We agreed to create a nova-manage command to do BDM clean up and 
then add a unique constraint in S
     * mriedem will restore the device name spec and someone else can 
pick it up


The spec is now restored:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/452546/

But I don't know who was going to take it over (dansmith?).


   * Validate policy when creating a server group
     * We can create a server group that have no policies (empty 
policies) currently. We can create a server with it, but all related 
scheduler filters return True, so it is useless

     * Spec: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/546484
     * We agreed this should be a simple thing to do, spec review is 
underway. We also said we should consider lumping in some other trivial 
API cleanup into the same microversion - we have a lot of TODOs for 
similar stuff like this in the API


I think https://review.openstack.org/#/c/546925/ will supersede ^ so we 
should probably hold off on Takashi's spec until we know for sure what 
we're doing about the hard-affinity policy limit stuff.


--

Thanks,

Matt

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


[openstack-dev] [nova] Rocky PTG summary - miscellaneous topics from Friday

2018-03-20 Thread melanie witt

Howdy all,

I've put together an etherpad [0] with summaries of the items from the 
Friday miscellaneous session from the PTG at the Croke Park Hotel "game 
room" across from the bar area. I didn't summarize all of the items, but 
attempted to do so for most of them, namely the ones that had 
discussion/decisions about them.


Cheers,
-melanie

[0] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-ptg-rocky-misc-summary

*Friday Miscellaneous: Rocky PTG Summary

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-ptg-rocky L281

*Key topics

  * Team / review policy
  * Technical debt and cleanup
* Removing nova-network and legacy cells v1
* Community goal to remove usage of mox3 in unit tests
* Dropping support of running nova-api and the metadata API service 
under eventlet

* Cruft surrounding rebuild and evacuate
* Bumping the minimum required version of libvirt
* Nova's 'enabled_perf_events' feature will be broken with Linux 
Kernel 4.14+ (the feature has been removed from the kernel)

  * Miscellaneous topics from the PTG etherpad

*Agreements and decisions

  * On team / review policy, for the Rocky cycle we're going to 
experiment with a process for "runways" wherein we'll focus review 
bandwidth on selected blueprints in 2 week time-boxes

* Details here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-runways-rocky
  * On technical debt and cleanup:
* We're going to remove nova-network this cycle and see how it 
goes. Then we'll look toward removing legacy cells v1.
* NOTE: If you're planning to work on the community-wide goal of 
removing mox3 usage, don't bother refactoring nova-network and legacy 
cells v1 unit tests. Those tests will be entirely removed soon-ish.
* We're going to dump a warning on service startup and add a 
release note for deprecation, and plan for removal of support for 
running nova-api and the metadata API service under eventlet in S

  * Patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/549510/
* For rebuild, we're going to defer the instance.save() until 
conductor has passed scheduling and before it casts to compute in order 
to address the issue of rolling back instance values if something fails 
during rebuild scheduling
  * For future work on rebuild tech debt, there was an idea to 
deprecate "evacuate" and add an option to rebuild like "--elsewhere" to 
collapse the two into using nearly the same code path. Evacuate is a 
rebuild and it would be nice to represent it as such. Someone would need 
to write up a spec for this.
* We're going to bump the minimum required libvirt version: 
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LibvirtDistroSupportMatrix

  * kashyap is going to do this
* We're going to log a warning if enabled_perf_events is set in 
nova.conf and mark it as deprecated for removal

  * kashyap is going to do this
  * Abort Cold Migration
* This would add a new API and a significant amount of complexity 
as it prone to race conditions (for example, abort request lands just 
after the disk migration has finished, having to restore the original 
instance), etc.
* We would like to have greater interest from operators for the 
feature before going down that path
* takashin will email openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org to 
ask if there is broader interest in the feature

  * Abort live migrations in queued status
* We agreed this is reasonable functionality to add, just need to 
work out the details on the spec
* Kevin_Zheng will update the spec: 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/536722/

  * Adding request_id field to migrations object
* The goal here is to be able to lookup the instance action for a 
failed migration to determine why it failed, and the request_id is 
needed to lookup the instance action.
* We agreed to add the request_id instance action notification 
instead and gibi will do this: 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/add-request-id-to-instance-action-notifications
  * Returning Flavor Extra Specs in GET /flavors/detail and GET 
/flavors/{flavor_id}
* 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/add-extra-specs-to-flavor-list
* Doing this would create parity between the servers API (when 
showing the instance.flavor) and the flavors API
* We agreed to add a new microversion and implement it the same way 
as we have for instance.flavor using policy as the control on whether to 
show the extra specs

  * Adding host and Error Code field to instance action event
* We agreed that it would be reasonable to add a new microversion 
to add the host (how it's shown to be based on a policy check) to the 
instance action event but the error code is a much more complex, 
cross-project, community-wide effort so we're not going to pursue that 
for now

* Spec for adding host: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/543277/
  * Allow specifying tolerance for (soft)(anti-)affinity groups
* This requirement is about adding an attribute to the group to 
limit the amount of how hard the