| *** wanghao_ has quit IRC | 00:13 | |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 00:13 | |
| openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/mogan master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/494831 | 00:38 |
|---|---|---|
| *** wanghao_ has joined #openstack-mogan | 00:51 | |
| *** litao__ has joined #openstack-mogan | 00:52 | |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 00:54 | |
| openstackgerrit | wanghao proposed openstack/mogan master: Manage existing BMs: Part-1 https://review.openstack.org/479660 | 01:14 |
| zhenguo | morning mogan! | 01:48 |
| openstackgerrit | Xinran WANG proposed openstack/mogan master: Get rid of flavor access https://review.openstack.org/495758 | 01:58 |
| openstackgerrit | Zhong Luyao proposed openstack/python-moganclient master: Add interface attach/detach support https://review.openstack.org/466168 | 02:01 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/mogan master: Do not allow to remove flavor which is still in use. https://review.openstack.org/493412 | 02:12 |
| litao__ | morning | 02:17 |
| zhenguo | litao__: o/ | 02:22 |
| zhenguo | Xinran: hi, do you want to take this https://bugs.launchpad.net/mogan/+bug/1712234 :D | 02:23 |
| openstack | Launchpad bug 1712234 in Mogan "No keypair info in server object" [Undecided,New] | 02:23 |
| Xinran | zhenguo, sure | 02:25 |
| zhenguo | Xinran: hah, thanks! | 02:25 |
| Xinran | zhenguo, np | 02:25 |
| Xinran | zhenguo, is the key info only visible for admin users ? | 02:26 |
| zhenguo | Xinran: no, for users | 02:26 |
| Xinran | zhenguo, all users ? | 02:27 |
| zhenguo | Xinran: as users can create and specify keys | 02:27 |
| zhenguo | Xinran: yes | 02:27 |
| Xinran | zhenguo, ok, got it | 02:27 |
| zhenguo | Xinran: we just save what the users specified when claiming a server | 02:27 |
| Xinran | zhenguo, so save key info as a field of server ? | 02:28 |
| zhenguo | Xinran: yes, maybe just key name is enough | 02:28 |
| Xinran | zhenguo, ok | 02:28 |
| *** wanghao_ has quit IRC | 02:29 | |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 02:31 | |
| openstackgerrit | Xinran WANG proposed openstack/mogan master: support specifying port_id when attaching interface https://review.openstack.org/494121 | 02:33 |
| litao__ | zhenguo,liusheng : see my comments https://review.openstack.org/#/c/476862/ | 02:37 |
| *** afantijiangxl has joined #openstack-mogan | 02:50 | |
| zhenguo | afantijiangxl: hi :D | 02:51 |
| afantijiangxl | hi | 02:51 |
| *** afantijiangxl is now known as afanti | 02:56 | |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/mogan master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/494831 | 02:58 |
| zhenguo | litao__: I'm ok with your comments :D | 02:58 |
| litao__ | zhenguo: thanks | 02:59 |
| zhenguo | litao__: np | 02:59 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: please have a look at the managing running servers patch 1, we can land it first then litao__ can update the second one | 03:01 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: need more reviews on that | 03:01 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: ok, will review soon | 03:01 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: thanks! | 03:01 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: np | 03:01 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 03:03 | |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 03:03 | |
| litao__ | liusheng: see my reply | 03:11 |
| liusheng | litao__: ok | 03:11 |
| liusheng | litao__: replied inline | 03:14 |
| openstackgerrit | Zhenguo Niu proposed openstack/mogan master: Return addresses with server API object https://review.openstack.org/495826 | 03:16 |
| * zhenguo brb | 03:18 | |
| liusheng | zhenguo: still here ? | 03:19 |
| liusheng | wanghao: hi, why don't raise an exception when cannot connect to ironic in listing manageable nodes ? | 03:20 |
| *** luyao has joined #openstack-mogan | 03:28 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: yes | 03:34 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: the question I asked wanghao, do you know if ther is any reason ? ^^ | 03:34 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: maybe we can just treat it as a [] | 03:35 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: but user may assume there is not manageable servers | 03:36 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: i have left some comments on that patch, may you can check again | 03:38 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: ok | 03:51 |
| openstackgerrit | Zhenguo Niu proposed openstack/mogan master: Return addresses with server API object https://review.openstack.org/495826 | 05:29 |
| wanghao | zhenguo: liusheng: yeah, it should raise a exception if we cannot get node from ironic. | 05:59 |
| openstackgerrit | wanghao proposed openstack/mogan master: Manage existing BMs: Part-1 https://review.openstack.org/479660 | 06:02 |
| openstackgerrit | wanghao proposed openstack/mogan master: Manage existing BMs: Part-1 https://review.openstack.org/479660 | 06:11 |
| openstackgerrit | wanghao proposed openstack/mogan master: Add some missing logs in Mogan https://review.openstack.org/492917 | 06:16 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/mogan master: Replace server fault_info with fault https://review.openstack.org/495138 | 06:44 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/mogan master: Add missed testing requirements https://review.openstack.org/494050 | 06:46 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/mogan master: Remove the duplicate flavor disable check https://review.openstack.org/494771 | 06:56 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-moganclient master: Improve flavor set command to support updating flavor https://review.openstack.org/486865 | 07:17 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: please have a look at this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/493495/ when you got time | 07:27 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: oh, sorry forgot that :( | 07:28 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: hah | 07:28 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: will review :) | 07:28 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: thanks! | 07:29 |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: Gerrit is going to be restarted due to slow performance | 07:36 | |
| openstackgerrit | Zhenguo Niu proposed openstack/python-moganclient master: Use new keyword *baremetalcompute* https://review.openstack.org/496138 | 07:39 |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: Gerrit has been restarted successfully | 07:41 | |
| openstackgerrit | liusheng proposed openstack/mogan master: WIP:Add affinity_zone field for server object https://review.openstack.org/495725 | 08:30 |
| openstackgerrit | liusheng proposed openstack/mogan master: Add support for scheduler_hints https://review.openstack.org/463534 | 08:30 |
| openstackgerrit | liusheng proposed openstack/mogan master: WIP: use server group in scheduler https://review.openstack.org/496151 | 08:30 |
| openstackgerrit | wanghao proposed openstack/mogan master: Manage existing BMs: Part-1 https://review.openstack.org/479660 | 09:02 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: I added a patch to replace the client keyword https://review.openstack.org/496138 :D | 09:18 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: ok, will look it :) | 09:19 |
| zhenguo | wangaho, litao__, shaohe_feng, Xinran, luyao: please have a look at the above patch | 09:19 |
| zhenguo | wanghao^^ | 09:19 |
| wanghao | zhenguo: sure | 09:19 |
| wanghao | zhenguo: looks great | 09:20 |
| zhenguo | wanghao: hah, I tried it, it works fine except a bit long | 09:21 |
| wanghao | zhenguo: yeah haha | 09:23 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: seems it is introduce much inconvenience that a node can be in different aggregates :( | 09:32 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: but it's convenience to users :D | 09:32 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: maybe, but maybe don't support that is also reasonable :) | 09:33 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: you mean a node can only be in one aggregate? | 09:34 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 09:34 | |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 09:35 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: that's not flexible | 09:35 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 09:35 | |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 09:35 | |
| liusheng | zhenguo: yes, currently, the aggregates is like classifying tags on nodes I think, we can use aggregate metadata to do that. | 09:35 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: who | 09:36 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 09:36 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: how | 09:36 |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 09:36 | |
| liusheng | zhenguo: admins or operators | 09:37 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 09:37 | |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 09:37 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: I may need to define several groups like high_mem, FPGA, GPU | 09:37 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: acutally, I think the currectly implemenation is also complex for admins | 09:37 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: why? | 09:38 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 09:38 | |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 09:38 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: why do you think it's complex for admins | 09:38 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: yes, that is reasonable, but a node can be in different aggregates make things more complex | 09:38 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 09:38 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: a node can have high_mem and GPU at the same time | 09:38 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: so it must be in different groups | 09:38 |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 09:39 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: or there's maybe test_team and dev_team aggregate | 09:39 |
| *** wanghao has quit IRC | 09:39 | |
| zhenguo | liusheng: you may want some nodes can be consumed by both | 09:39 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: yes, we can add multiple tags/metadata on a aggreagete | 09:40 |
| *** wanghao has joined #openstack-mogan | 09:40 | |
| liusheng | zhenguo: I remember in Nova, the aggregate initially indicats a set of nodes with similar properties | 09:40 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: we are same with nova for admins | 09:41 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: so we can add different tags on a aggregate including similar nodes | 09:42 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: similar properties | 09:42 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: sure | 09:42 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: so I think it is no effects if a node only be in one aggregate | 09:43 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: that wil let admins must know which node in which aggreagte | 09:43 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: of course you can use that way to define aggregates if you like | 09:43 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: but we should not hard limit that | 09:44 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: maybe I didn't descripted clearly, but a node in a affinity zone, the node can be in one or more aggregates which with same metadata key (affinit_zone) and value, and this node can also be in otheres aggregate without affinity_zone metadata. in this situation, all the nodes in the "others" aggregates cannot be in a affinity_zone, or must be in same affinity zone of the node | 09:50 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: yes | 09:51 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: and it is hard for admins to clarify the relationship, I guess you will say admins don't need care about this :) | 09:52 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: hah | 09:52 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: admins should define availability zone and affinity zone first | 09:53 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: once a problem occured, it may be hard to clarify this relationship | 09:53 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: if admins define things that complex, it's not our problem | 09:53 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: they make the mistake, not us | 09:54 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: but if you let one node can only be in an aggregate | 09:54 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: sometimes, when a develop env running a long time, many things may will become complex, admins cannot controll, hah | 09:55 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: that means you have only one aggregate in a deployment with only one az | 09:55 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: why ? | 09:55 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: assume you have define one az in your deployment | 09:56 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: then you got an aggregate | 09:56 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: you can't define another aggregate, as the node only can in one aggregate | 09:56 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: I mean for a deployment with only one az | 09:57 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: sorry, i didn't understant.. :) in this situation why we cannot define another aggregate ? | 09:58 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: oh, seems it's not | 09:59 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: we can also add the az metadata for another aggregate | 09:59 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: I think the problem is that, you make the aggregate defination based on node not group | 10:01 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: as my understanding, as an cloud deployer, they may define groups first, then classify node to those groups | 10:02 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: that will make one node in different groups happen, as nodes will got traits that some groups have at the same time | 10:02 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: your proposal is more like placement traits which on rp, but our metadata is on group | 10:06 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: hmm.. seems, yes, if all things are based on traits on rp, that also make things clear, we introduce I think it is for convenience to add metadata on a set of nodes (an aggregate) than every nodes. | 10:08 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: may need to think more :) | 10:08 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: yes, if you want to based on traits/tags, we don't need to introduce aggregate notion anymore | 10:09 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: btw, I got an error with placement | 10:10 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: when updating resource, I got Unable to refresh my resource provider redord | 10:11 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: and it repeated for many times | 10:11 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: I just found server_group and your aggregate matedata patches looks a complex logical and just concern that may lead the complexity for admins in the future :) | 10:11 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: connection failure ? | 10:12 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: no, just happend after I enrolled a new node | 10:12 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: the code complexity is just aims to make users convience | 10:13 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: did the reporting for enrolled node works correctly ? | 10:13 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: no, there's already a record there | 10:13 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: as I delete the node and then enrolled it again | 10:14 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: it first got this https://github.com/openstack/mogan/blob/master/mogan/scheduler/client/report.py#L334 | 10:16 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: may need to debug | 10:16 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: then https://github.com/openstack/mogan/blob/master/mogan/scheduler/client/report.py#L520 | 10:17 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: seems it's not added in _resource_providers cache | 10:17 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: did you check the inventory, resource_providers, allocations, resource_class tables after deleting the rp | 10:21 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: it's not deleted | 10:21 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: I just delete the ironic node, but seems before the update resources happen, I added the node back | 10:22 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: maybe that's because the rp name is the node name instead of uuid | 10:23 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: it is possible | 10:24 |
| liusheng | zhenguo: sorry, I have to go :) | 10:25 |
| zhenguo | liusheng: ok, bye | 10:26 |
| * zhenguo brb | 10:28 | |
| openstackgerrit | Zhenguo Niu proposed openstack/mogan master: Clean up server node uuid on task revert https://review.openstack.org/496207 | 11:21 |
| openstackgerrit | Zhenguo Niu proposed openstack/mogan master: Clean up server node uuid on task revert https://review.openstack.org/496207 | 11:43 |
| openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/mogan master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/496211 | 11:48 |
| openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/python-moganclient master: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/494902 | 11:56 |
| *** litao__ has quit IRC | 11:58 | |
| *** afanti has quit IRC | 15:55 | |
| *** lin_yang has joined #openstack-mogan | 18:41 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!