July 2024 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

attach both virtio-scsi and virtio-blk to an instance
by Jiatong Shen 07 Jul '24

07 Jul '24

Hello, I am searching whether it is possible to use both virtio-scsi and virtio-blk at the same time for one instance. I knew it was possible to use each of them separately. I have this requirement because virtio-blk is not possible to support as many as devices like virtio-scsi, but we still want to keep virtio-blk for performance reasons and for legacy instances. Thank you for help. -- Best Regards, Jiatong Shen

2 2

when deleting an instance, its volume is not deleted
by kjme001＠gmail.com 07 Jul '24

07 Jul '24

I have the following problem, when deleting an instance, its volume is not deleted along with it, the volume remains and I then have to execute the command to detach the volume from the non-existent instance and then delete it. I don't know what could be causing this, the volume should probably be deleted together with the instance being deleted Thank you for your help

1 0

Magnum Caracal: magnum-conductor fails with after sql QueuePool limit exhaustion
by Michel Jouvin 06 Jul '24

06 Jul '24

Hi, In our tests of Magnum Caracal, we are experiencing a bad error in openstack-magnum-conductor causing it not to work until it is restarted. The problem is caused by a high number of connections to the magnum DB (compared to what can be seen in Antelope version), exceeding the QueuePool limit configured with max_pool_size (+ an overflow of 50). This is described with more details at https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/2067345 that remained mostly unanswered (but with several people joining to say they were experiencing the same issue). Are they people running Magnum Caracal on this list? Are you experiencing the same issue? In our case we are using RDO distribution (EL9-based) and the Magnum DB is on a remote server. Any suggestion welcome! Best regards, Michel

1 0

Kolla-Ansible Issues
by Alexandra Rong 06 Jul '24

06 Jul '24

Hello OpenStack-Ansible team, We are students in Germany studying Business Informatics. Currently, we have a project where we need to build an OpenStack environment using Kolla-Ansible. Our goal is to use Gnocchi and CloudKitty to gather metrics on the usage of the VMs in OpenStack. We tried following the official Kolla-Ansible deployment guide but encountered issues starting Kolla-Ansible, as shown in the attached screenshots. Could you possibly help us? Best regards, Felix and Alexandra Ansible.cfg: Error: All-in-one:

5 4

[openstack-helm] SQLAlchemy 2.0 support
by Mohammed Naser 06 Jul '24

06 Jul '24

Hi everyone! It seems like our db-init jobs are broken with the latest version of OpenStack because it doesn’t work with SQLAlchemy 2.0 2024-05-31 03:21:34,290 - OpenStack-Helm DB Init - INFO - Got DB root connection 2024-05-31 03:21:34,290 - OpenStack-Helm DB Init - INFO - Using /etc/keystone/keystone.conf as db config source 2024-05-31 03:21:34,292 - OpenStack-Helm DB Init - INFO - Trying to load db config from database:connection 2024-05-31 03:21:34,292 - OpenStack-Helm DB Init - INFO - Got config from /etc/keystone/keystone.conf 2024-05-31 03:21:34,331 - OpenStack-Helm DB Init - INFO - Tested connection to DB @ percona-xtradb-haproxy.openstack.svc.cluster.local:3306 as root 2024-05-31 03:21:34,332 - OpenStack-Helm DB Init - INFO - Got user db config 2024-05-31 03:21:34,332 - OpenStack-Helm DB Init - CRITICAL - Could not create database keystone Traceback (most recent call last): File "/tmp/db-init.py", line 112, in <module> root_engine.execute("CREATE DATABASE IF NOT EXISTS {0}".format(database)) AttributeError: 'Engine' object has no attribute 'execute' I was wondering if it makes sense to fix this, or if this is something that we should just take the time to simply replace with some sort of simple operator that creates manages/watches database CRs (if one doesn’t exist?) Thanks Mohammed

2 2

[kuryr][tc] Final call for Kuryr PTL/DPL liaisons
by Ghanshyam Mann 05 Jul '24

05 Jul '24

Hello Everyone, Kuryr project ends up being a leaderless project for the 2024.2 Dalmatian cycle[1]. There is no volunteer to serve as PTL or DPL liaisons yet. As the next step, I have proposed to mark this project Inactive: - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/916945 If you would like to serve as a leader and help maintain this project, this is the right time to step up by replying to this email or commenting in gerrit change 916945. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/2024.2-leaderless#L99 Ref: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/emerging-technology-and-inact… -gmann

4 9

[Neutron] Is there a way to work around "External network not reachable from subnet" by setting a static route?
by Florian Haas 05 Jul '24

05 Jul '24

Hi everyone, here's a question I've been chewing on for some time. Please bear with me while I illustrate the background. 1. Suppose you have a regular (internal) Neutron network, subnet, and router. You now plug the subnet into the router and set an external gateway. You then create a port on the subnet. You associate a floating IP with that port. All is well. 2. Suppose instead you do plug the subnet into the router, but you don't set an external gateway on it. You try to associate a floating IP with that port. This creates a BadRequest because: "External network <uuid> is not reachable from subnet <uuid>". 3. Suppose instead you do set an external gateway on the router, but you don't connect the subnet to it. Again, you try to associate a floating IP with that port. This also creates a BadRequest because: "External network <uuid> is not reachable from subnet <uuid>". So far, so good. Up to this point, everything is behaving according to intuitive expectations. Now suppose we have * the external network, * an "outer" internal network, * a Neutron router connecting the two (that is, the router has the external network as its gateway, and has an interface to the "outer" subnet), * an "inner" internal network, * a Nova server (let's call that the "gateway"), which connects the "inner" and "outer" networks, a * another Nova server (the "worker") that sits on the "inner" network. (Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that the "gateway" runs some kind of web application firewall or other virtual security appliance, and the "worker" is a general-purpose Linux instance.) Now I can give the Neutron router a static route so that traffic to the "inner" network uses the "gateway" as its nexthop. Provided the "gateway" does its forwarding correctly, this means that the "worker" has internet connectivity via the "gateway" (which, in turn, achieves this via the router). This, too, works fine for outbound connections originating with the "worker". If I now want to assign a floating IP to the "worker", then routing-wise there really should be no problem: the router should take care of SNAT/DNAT, it would translate the floating IP into a private IP on the "inner" network, would consult its routing table, and throw packets for that "inner" network to the "gateway" to handle, per the static route that's been set. But when I try to associate a floating IP to the "worker" in this scenario, I *still* get the "External network not reachable from subnet" error, because the associated internal check[1] does not take the existing static route into account. This appears to have been an issue in other contexts as well: the defunct Tricircle project appears to have worked around this limitation via a service plugin that just omitted that check.[2] Now my questions are these: 1. Shouldn't this be fixed in core, instead? It would seem to me like the default check is too simplistic, but I might be missing something. 2. Is there a way to make this check take static routes into account, other than providing a service plugin like Tricircle used to do? Thanks! Cheers, Florian References: [1] get_router_for_floatingip(): https://opendev.org/openstack/neutron/src/commit/ebed620aafdff75a05fb5d42ad… [2] get_router_for_floatingip(): https://opendev.org/openstack/tricircle/src/commit/8db8fb30f5757c46a953962d…

2 3

[ironic] the fate of ironic-hardware-inventory-recorder-image
by Dmitry Tantsur 05 Jul '24

05 Jul '24

Hi folks! The project in question (https://github.com/metal3-io/ironic-hardware-inventory-recorder-image) was created as part of our effort to allow updating introspection data in ironic-inspector from inside of already running ("active" in the ironic terminology) instances. It is a container image that packages ironic-python-agent in a way that limits its activity to finding ironic-inspector and posting data to it. The initial plans did not happen, ironic-inspector is pending deprecation in favor of ironic's built-in inspection, and the project is unused by anyone in the Metal3 ecosystem. We want to archive and eventually remove it, but we've heard that some members of the ironic community (CERN? CC'ing Arne) are using it. If you do have an interest in this approach, please reach out to me to organize a take-over of the project. Dmitry

4 5

[release] Release countdown for week R-12, Jul 08-12
by Elõd Illés 05 Jul '24

05 Jul '24

Development Focus ----------------- We are now past the Dalmatian-2 milestone, and entering the last development phase of the cycle. Teams should be focused on implementing planned work for the cycle. Now is a good time to review those plans and reprioritize anything if needed based on the what progress has been made and what looks realistic to complete in the next few weeks. General Information ------------------- Looking ahead to the end of the release cycle, please be aware of the feature freeze dates. Those vary depending on deliverable type: * General libraries (except client libraries) need to have their last feature release before Non-client library freeze (August 22nd, 2024). Their stable branches are cut early. * Client libraries (think python-*client libraries) need to have their last feature release before Client library freeze (August 29th, 2024) * Deliverables following a cycle-with-rc model (that would be most services) observe a Feature freeze on that same date, August 29th, 2024. Any feature addition beyond that date should be discussed on the mailing-list and get PTL approval. After feature freeze, cycle-with-rc deliverables need to produce a first release candidate (and a stable branch) before RC1 deadline (September 12th, 2024) * Deliverables following cycle-with-intermediary model can release as necessary, but in all cases before Final RC deadline (September 25th, 2024) Upcoming Deadlines & Dates -------------------------- Non-client library freeze: August 22nd, 2024 (R-6 week) Client library freeze: August 29th, 2024 (R-5 week) Dalmatian-3 milestone: August 29th, 2024 (R-5 week) Előd Illés irc: elodilles @ #openstack-release

1 0

[neutron] Neutron drivers meeting cancelled
by Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez 05 Jul '24

05 Jul '24

Hello Neutrinos: Due to the lack of quorum, today's Neutron drivers meeting will be cancelled. Have a nice weekend.

1 0