June 2020 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[openstack-ansible] PTG results
by Dmitriy Rabotyagov 06 Jun '20

06 Jun '20

Hi there, Sorry for the previous email - it has been sent accidentally - it was just at the draft stage... I did some formating afterwards:) Here are some of the decisions we come up with during the PTG week: * CentOS 8 topic. ** Install systemd-extras to get systemd-networkd ** Launch without LXC build at first because of the complexity of the solution. To implement LXC we would need the following: *** Replace what `machinectl` does with Ansible tasks, as it's not working properly without btrfs *** See how much it costs to implement lxd - that would not only resolve Centos 8 issue, but also is pretty appreciated among comunity. However, installing in with snapd will auto-update. it's possible to delay up to 60 days the updates but still needs to fix/clean ** Make nspawn unmaintained, because it mostly relies on machinectl. *** Remove nspawn from docs. *** Remove code in cycle afterwards. ** Backport CentOS 8 to Ussuri, drop CentOS 7 for Victoria afterwards. *** On Ussuri CentOS 7 is going to live without distro support *** write reno, that explains that distro installed OSA upgrade path might be tricky/broken for CentOS because of absent Centos7 packages for U. * Logs topic ** finish transition to journald *** check heat for logging *** check for ceph logs - see [1] but this may be a result of the way cephadm containerises all the ceph daemons ** Rewrite log collection script on python with systemd python bindings and get deprecated messages from services' journal into separate file ** Check where we don't use uwsgi role and see if we can use it there now (like designate) ** Check through the logs what roles are we covered with tempest, and what not. We have buch of roles that run tempest, but test like only keystone (but not itself). ** We add libvirtd_exporter [2] to ansible-role-requirements and offer it's deployments on users own prometheus. Offer prometheus deployment as step2. Document usage * Promote ELK stack to 1st class thing ** Create a separate repo and remove from openstack-ansible-ops ** provide out-of-the-box deployment with OSA. Model would be similar to ceph-ansible where deployment can be integrated or standalone * Work on speeding up OSA runtime: ** Fight with skipped tasks (ie by moving them to separate files that would be included) - most valid for systemd service, systemd_networkd and python_venv_build roles ** Try to split up variables by group_vars ** Try to use include instead of imports again * speedup ci ** try to speedup zuul required projects clone process - work with infra team ** Set *_db_setup_host across all roles to utility and adjust [7] * Build mariadb deps for focal (like 10.4.12 release). We can use repo.vexxhost.net for hosting it until mariadb 10.4.14 release. * In case having issues with distro jobs/support we don't hestitate remove it or setting to non-voting state * Remove SUSE support early in Victoria. We already have [4] for this - needs rebasing * Add neutron ovn to integrated tests (with perspective to make it default for new deployments). * Drop resource creation tasks out of os_tempest - OSA and TripleO manage resource creation themselves and pass required vars to os_tempest for config generation * Add support for zookeeper deployment for services coordination (like telemetry, designate, etc) * add tooling to bootstrap-ansible to apply provided gerrit patches for roles - start with this [3] * Try to add aarch64 jobs with separate pipeline once we have some python wheels built up * Migrate group names to remove underscores "The TRANSFORM_INVALID_GROUP_CHARS settings is set to allow bad characters in group names by default, this will change, but still be user configurable on deprecation. This feature will be removed in version 2.10" * add tooling to bootstrap-ansible to apply provided gerrit patches for roles - start with this [5] use it like this [6] * publish common roles (galera, haproxy, memcached, uwsgi, python_venv_build, etc...) to galaxy, rename them to ansible-role-* pattern. As a stage 2 consider publishing os roles. * add some check for repo server, to verify it's ok (lua linters check) instead of failing afterwards because of missing dev libraries for hosts [1] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/be117b555fc1bba1048b87a624d542fd629d1ad1/… [2] https://github.com/jrosser/rd-ansible-libvirtd-exporter [3] http://paste.openstack.org/show/794258/ [4] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/725541/ [5] http://paste.openstack.org/show/794258/ [6] http://paste.openstack.org/show/794259/ [7] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/671454

1 1

[nova] running nova-scheduler in a container
by Jean-Philippe Méthot 06 Jun '20

06 Jun '20

Hi, I’ve been building my own docker images as a mean to both learn docker and to see if we can make our own images and run them in production. I’ve figured out how to make most services run fairly well. However, an issue remains with nova-scheduler and I can’t seem to figure out what’s going on. Essentially, when I try to create a VM it loops in a scheduling state and when I try to delete a VM, it loops forever in a deleting state. I’ve narrowed down the culprit to nova-scheduler. As far as I know, nothing appears in the debug logs of my containerized nova-scheduler whenever I do any kind of action, which forces me to believe that nova-scheduler is not receiving any command. From what I’ve always understood, nova-scheduler works through RPC and Rabbitmq. The fact that this nova-scheduler connects to rabbitmq without issue makes me believe that something else is missing from my container configuration. Does Nova-scheduler listen on network port? Does it listen on a socket? Is there any way that nova-scheduler could ignore requests sent to it? Jean-Philippe Méthot Senior Openstack system administrator Administrateur système Openstack sénior PlanetHoster inc.

2 2

[openstack-ansible] PTG results
by Dmitriy Rabotyagov 06 Jun '20

06 Jun '20

1 0

[nova][ptg] virtual PTG
by Balázs Gibizer 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

Hi, I need to book slots for nova discussions on the official schedule[2] of the virtual PTG[1]. I need two things to do that: 1) What topics we have that needs real-time discussion. Please add those to the etherpad [3] 2) Who wants to join such real-time discussion and what time slots works for you. Please fill the doodle[4] Based on the current etherpad content we need 2-3 slots for nova discussion and a half slot for cross project (current neutron) discussion. Please try to provide your topics and options before the Thursday's nova meeting. Cheers, gibi [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-April/014126.ht… [2] https://ethercalc.openstack.org/126u8ek25noy [3] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg [4] https://doodle.com/poll/ermn3vxy9v53aayy

1 5

[nova][neutron][ptg] How to increase the minimum bandwidth guarantee of a running instance
by Balázs Gibizer 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

Hi, [This is a topic from the PTG etherpad [0]. As the PTG time is intentionally kept short, let's try to discuss it or even conclude it before the PTG] As a next step in the minimum bandwidth QoS support I would like to solve the use case where a running instance has some ports with minimum bandwidth but then user wants to change (e.g. increase) the minimum bandwidth used by the instance. I see two generic ways to solve the use case: Option A - interface attach --------------------------- Attach a new port with minimum bandwidth to the instance to increase the instance's overall bandwidth guarantee. This only impacts Nova's interface attach code path: 1) The interface attach code path needs to read the port's resource request 2) Call Placement GET /allocation_candidates?in_tree=<compute RP of the instance> 3a) If placement returns candidates then select one and modify the current allocation of the instance accordingly and continue the existing interface attach code path. 3b) If placement returns no candidates then there is no free resource left on the instance's current host to resize the allocation locally. Option B - QoS rule update -------------------------- Allow changing the minimum bandwidth guarantee of a port that is already bound to the instance. Today Neutron rejects such QoS rule update. If we want to support such update then: * either Neutron should call placement allocation_candidates API and the update the instance's allocation. Similarly what Nova does in Option A. * or Neutron should tell Nova that the resource request of the port has been changed and then Nova needs to call Placement and update instance's allocation. The Option A and Option B are not mutually exclusive but still I would like to see what is the preference of the community. Which direction should we move forward? Both options have the limitation that if the instance's current host does not have enough free resources for the requested change then Nova will not do a full scheduling and move the instance to another host where resource is available. This seems a hard problem to me. Do you have any idea how can we remove / ease this limitation without boiling the ocean? For example: Does it make sense to implement a bandwidth weigher in the scheduler so instances can be spread by free bandwidth during creation? Cheers, gibi [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg

3 6

[nova][neutron][ptg] Future of the routed network support
by Balázs Gibizer 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

Hi, [This is a topic from the PTG etherpad [0]. As the PTG time is intentionally kept short, let's try to discuss it or even conclude it before the PTG] There is only basic scheduling support in nova for the neutron routed networks feature (server create with port.ip_allocation=deferred seems to work). There was multiple attempts in the past to complete the support (e.g.server create with port.ip_allocation=immediate or server move operations). The latest attempt started by Matt couple of cycles ago, and in the last cycle I tried to push that forward[1]. When I added this topic to the PTG etherpad I thought I will have time in the Victoria cycle to continue [1] but internal priorities has changed. So finishing this feature needs some developers. If there are volunteers for Victoria then please let me know and then we can keep this as a topic for the PTG but otherwise I will remove it from the schedule. Cheers, gibi [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:routed-networks-scheduling

2 2

[nova][ptg] Can we close old bugs?
by Balázs Gibizer 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

Hi, [This is a topic from the PTG etherpad [0]. As the PTG time is intentionally kept short, let's try to discuss it or even conclude it before the PTG] We have more than 800 open bugs in nova [1] and the oldest is 8 years old. Can we close old bugs? If yes, what would be the closing criteria? Age and status? Personally I would close every bug that is not updated in the last 3 years and not in INPROGRESS state. Cheers, gibi [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.searchtext=&orderby=-importance…

5 7

[nova][ptg] bumping compute RPC to 6.0
by Balázs Gibizer 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

Hi, [This is a topic from the PTG etherpad [0]. As the PTG time is intentionally kept short, let's try to discuss it or even conclude it before the PTG] Do we want to bump the compute RPC to 6.0 in Victoria? We did not have the full view what we can gain[2] with such bump so Stephen and I searched through nova and collected the things we could clean up [1] eventually if we bump the compute RPC to 6.0 in Victoria. I can work on the RPC 6.0 patch during V and I think I can also help in with the possible cleanups later. Cheers, gibi [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/compute-rpc-6.0 [2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2020/nova.2020-04-16-16.00.log…

3 4

[manila][ptg] Minutes, recordings, final day items and Happy Hour!
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

Hello Zorillas and interested Stackers, It's Friday already, but it feels like we've been there every day this week! Thanks to note takers, we have the meeting etherpad up-to-date wrt the meetings we've had thus far. [1] Tomorrow, 5th June, Friday, we meet in the same room () between 1300 UTC and 1700 UTC - the schedule details are in the etherpad [1], however the main items are as below: - Optimize the quota processing logic for manage share (haixin) (1300-1330 UTC) - Share and share size quotas/limits per share server (carloss/dviroel) (1340-1410 UTC) - Share server migration (dviroel) (1420 - 1450 UTC) - Manila Container Storage Interface project update/roadmap/demo (tbarron) (1500-1530 UTC) - Manila OSC/CLI "common commands" discussion (maaritamm/vkmc) (1530-1550 UTC) - Virtual Happy Hour (all) (1600-1700 UTC) You'll find the recordings of our past discussions uploaded to YouTube [2]. Check the descriptions to skip ahead to specific topics. Please let me know if you have any difficulty accessing these videos. Hope to see you tomorrow! Thanks, Goutham Pacha Ravi [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/victoria-ptg-manila [2] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnpzT0InFrqBKkyIAQdA9RFJnx-geS3lp

1 0

[tripleo] Thanks for a great PTG :)
by Wesley Hayutin 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

Thanks all! Great topics, participation, discussion etc! Notes and a summary are in the works. And now your moment of zen.

1 0