June 2025 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[cinder]How do I configure Cinder to recognize free space in the data pool when using a Ceph Erasure Coded Pool?
by Yuta Kambe (Fujitsu) 03 Jun '25

03 Jun '25

Hi everyone, I'm using a Ceph Erasure Coded pool as the backend for OpenStack Cinder. I've created a replicated pool (volumes_meta) for metadata and an erasure-coded pool (volumes_data) for data, following the documentation here: https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/rados/operations/erasure-code/ When I set rbd_pool to volumes_meta in cinder.conf, I receive an "Insufficient free virtual space" error, even though volumes_data has ample free space. This is because Cinder is calculating free space based on the metadata pool. When rbd_pool is set to volumes_data, Cinder correctly calculates free space based on the data pool. However, I then encounter an "RBD operation not supported" error during volume creation. I need Cinder to recognize the free space available in volumes_data while avoiding the "RBD operation not supported" error. I'm unsure how to configure this correctly and would appreciate any advice. The following is supplemental information. cinder.conf is: [ceph] volume_driver = cinder.volume.drivers.rbd.RBDDriver volume_backend_name = ceph rbd_pool = volumes_meta rbd_ceph_conf = /etc/ceph/ceph.conf rbd_flatten_volume_from_snapshot = false rbd_max_clone_depth = 5 rbd_store_chunk_size = 4 rados_connect_timeout = -1 rbd_user = cinder rbd_secret_uuid = <uuid> For example, if the pool usage is as follows, Cinder gets 1.6TiB as the pool free space: $ ceph df --- POOLS --- POOL ID PGS STORED OBJECTS USED %USED MAX AVAIL volumes_meta 4 32 40 KiB 24 189 KiB 0 1.6 TiB volumes_data 7 32 61 GiB 15.67k 92 GiB 2.80 2.1 TiB $ cinder get-pools --detail +-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Property | Value | +-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | allocated_capacity_gb | 523 | | backend_state | up | | driver_version | 1.3.0 | | filter_function | None | | free_capacity_gb | 1592.07 <-★free capacity of volumes_meta | | goodness_function | None | | location_info | ceph:/etc/ceph/ceph.conf:<uuid>:cinder:volumes_meta | | max_over_subscription_ratio | 20.0 | | multiattach | True | | name | <hostname>@ceph#ceph | | qos_support | True | | replication_enabled | False | | reserved_percentage | 0 | | storage_protocol | ceph | | thin_provisioning_support | True | | timestamp | 2025-05-29T07:44:17.903149 | | total_capacity_gb | 1592.07 | | vendor_name | Open Source | | volume_backend_name | ceph | +-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ OpenStack and Ceph versions are: $ ceph -v ceph version 17.2.8 (f817ceb7f187defb1d021d6328fa833eb8e943b3) quincy (stable) $ dnf list --installed | grep openstack-cinder openstack-cinder.noarch 1:21.3.2-1.el9s @centos-openstack-zed

4 4

[kolla] Weekly meeting 04/06/2025 cancelled
by Michał Nasiadka 03 Jun '25

03 Jun '25

Hello Koalas, Due to clashes with other meetings from my side and majority of core reviewers - I’m cancelling the meeting tomorrow. See you next week Michal

1 0

[cyborg][nova][tc] cyborg support for pyproject.toml and failing ci jobs.
by Sean Mooney 03 Jun '25

03 Jun '25

hi everyone, tl;dr can anyone form the cyborg team approve https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/949772 As you all are likely aware when we updated the testing runtime for 2025.2 and unfroze the setuptool version by the removal of python 3.9 support setuptools 80 became available in ci. this resulted in any project that still religed on PBRs `wsgi_scripts` extension failing to deploy under devstack if they had note converted to providing a pyproject.toml Stephen finucan and i started trying to prepare openstack for this change 18 months ago but with the release of setup-tools 80 it became much more important given it blocked gates. while there are a lot of patches still in flight for other project https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22pip-23.1-support%22 im reaching out specifically related to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/949772 because the cyborg job on the nova repo has been failing for several weeks now. this change should fix the failing jobs on the cyborg repo too but the nova team does still check the status of the non voting job in our check pipeline too. i pushed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/949772 for review 20 days ago and i have a follow up to remove the jammy jobs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/949777/1 to align cyborgs testing to the testing runtime for this release. in general the cyborg repo seam to have a number of bot and procedural patches open for the last few release https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/cyborg+status:open so its not clear if any of the current core team member are active with that said there have been a few patches merged in the last 6 months https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/cyborg+status:merged so the cyborg team does not seam to be entirely inactive currently. if anyone form the cyborg team sees this could you please review those patches to unblock the cyborg gate. if we don't see movent on this after m2 ill probably propose removing the cyborg job form the nova check line since its currently just wasting ci time given it always fails. regard sean. ps note for the cyborg team https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cyborg/+/949772 also complete the cyborg part of https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/goals/proposed/migrate-… as that is the general approach we had selected to addressing the packaging issue sand adopting pyporejct.toml was required to make that possible since it was not merged before the setuptool changes.

1 0

[glance] pushing image to all stores upon creation
by Can Özyurt 03 Jun '25

03 Jun '25

Hi everyone, AFAIK the procedure to make an image available in all the stores is: 1) Create an image (on a selected/default store) 2) Import the image with all_stores option I am looking for ways to eliminate the second step and make uploading to all stores the default behaviour. 1) Is there a config for this? 2) If not, can glance plugins/flows be used to implement this behaviour? Both sync and async approaches are fine as long as images created via dashboard are pushed to all stores all well. Looking forward to your guidance. Thanks in advance. Regards, Can

2 6

Wallaby: Password rotation
by Albert Braden 03 Jun '25

03 Jun '25

I've been asked to rotate passwords in our Wallaby clusters. I found this document for zed: https://docs.openstack.org/kolla-ansible/zed/admin/password-rotation.html When I tried it in the lab I ended up with a broken cluster. Is it possible to rotate passwords in Wallaby?

1 0

[publiccloud-sig] Next meeting of Public Cloud SIG - June 4th at 0700 UTC
by Felix Kronlage-Dammers 02 Jun '25

02 Jun '25

Hi everyone, This upcoming Wednesday (June 4th - this is tomorrow :) the next meeting of the publiccloud-sig is going to happen. We’ll be meeting at 0700 UTC here: https://meetpad.opendev.org/publiccloud-sig See also here for all other details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PublicCloudSIG As I'm participating in the ALASCA Hackathon, I will not be able to join the SIG call myself. Have fun! cheers felix -- Felix Kronlage-Dammers Open Source Business Alliance - Bundesverband für digitale Souveränität e.V. Tel.: +49-30-206539-205 | Matrix: @fkronlage:matrix.org | fkr(a)osb-alliance.com

1 0

[tc][all] OpenStack Technical Committee Weekly Summary and Meeting Agenda (2025.2/R-17)
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 02 Jun '25

02 Jun '25

Hello Stackers, We're 17 weeks away from the release date for OpenStack 2025.2 "Flamingo" [1]. All projects following the cycle-trailing release model [2] will release their 2025.1 Epoxy deliverables by 2025-06-05, i.e., Thursday this week. The OpenStack Technical Committee is close to merging a resolution to require "Developer Certificate of Origin" [3] sign-offs from committers starting 2025-07-01. This will affect committers across the community. We request that you review what the DCO signifies [4] and how OpenStack governance plans to enforce it [3], and be prepared for the change. You can add "Signed-off-by" in your commit messages today. Project maintainers are requested to encourage this sign off, and spread the word to contributors via review comments and project team meetings. When Git is properly configured with your username and email, commit with the "-s" option to include the sign-off line in the commit message. In the past week, the TC didn't merge any new governance proposals; however, several, including the proposal to transition from the CLA to the DCO, are under review. === Weekly Meeting === Last week's meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee occurred on 2025-05-27 on OFTC's #openstack-tc channel [5]. We covered a range of topics, including DCO implementation, the OpenInfra User Survey, and gate health. The primary focus was on the transition from CLA (Contributor License Agreement) to DCO. Many tooling changes are under review to facilitate this transition. Discussions also clarified that all new patches after July 1st will require a DCO sign-off, and existing patches can be rebased and signed off in Gerrit. There was a brief discussion about potentially abandoning patches in merge-conflict without a sign-off after July 1st, but the consensus was to instead add a comment to inform contributors about the need for the DCO with the updated patchset. The 2025 OpenInfra User Survey is currently live and will close in August [6]. Foundation staff will collate responses and share them with project leads/liaisons and the OpenStack TC in September. The TC reviewed the existing questions and decided not to make changes to avoid confusing the summarization of responses. There was also an update regarding the 2024 user survey, with clarification that anonymized raw data will be shared with PTLs and the TC, and that an NDA may be required for access. The next meeting of the OpenStack TC is on 2025-06-03. This meeting will be hosted simultaneously over video and IRC. You're welcome to join through any platform that you prefer. The agenda and call details are posted to the meeting's wiki page [7]. I hope that you'll be able to join us. === Governance Proposals === ==== Merged ==== - Fix outdated info on the tc-guide | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/950446 ==== Open for review ==== - Require declaration of affiliation from TC Candidates | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/949432 - [resolution] Replace CLA with DCO for all contributions | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/950463 - Clarify actions when no elections are required | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/949431 - Add nova-contrib repository | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/951569 === Upcoming Events === - 2025-06-03: 15 ans d'OpenStack - OpenInfra UG, Paris: https://www.meetup.com/openstack-france/events/307492285 - 2025-06-05: OpenStack 15 ans! - OpenInfra UG, Rennes: https://www.meetup.com/openstack-rennes/events/306903998 - 2025-06-28: OpenInfra+Cloud Native Day, Vietnam: https://www.vietopeninfra.org/void2025 Thank you very much for reading! On behalf of the OpenStack TC, Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr) OpenStack TC Chair [1] 2025.2 "Flamingo" Release Schedule: https://releases.openstack.org/flamingo/schedule.html [2] "cycle-trailing": https://releases.openstack.org/reference/release_models.html#cycle-trailing [3] TC resolution to replace CLA with DCO for all contributions: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/950463 [4] Developer Certificate of Origin: https://developercertificate.org/ [5] TC Meeting IRC Log 2025-05-27: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-05-27-17.00.html [6] Take the 2025 OpenStack User Survey: https://www.openstack.org/user-survey/survey-2025/ [7] TC Meeting Agenda, 2025-06-03: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting

1 0

[ops][largescale-sig][scientific-sig] Ops Radio Hour on May 30, 2025
by Ildiko Vancsa 02 Jun '25

02 Jun '25

Hi OpenStack Community, I'm reaching out to you to draw your attention to a new online gathering called Ops Radio Hour. The call series is a casual setting for operators, engineers, and contributors to come together, share knowledge, and collaborate on the complexities of managing and deploying OpenStack environments. The first meeting is scheduled to May 30, 2025 at 1400UTC [1]. The call will happen on Meetpad, and you can find the agenda on the etherpad[2] created for the series. See You there! Best Regards, Ildikó [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Meetups#2025_Ops_Radio_Hour_Seri… [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack_ops_radiohour

2 4

[nova][horizon] VNC console policy
by Eugen Block 02 Jun '25

02 Jun '25

Hi *, I'm a bit confused regarding the policy requirements to grant a user access to the vnc console via horizon dashboard. Since we have 10 years of history in our cloud, I tried to remove legacy stuff, e.g. old policy files and try with the defaults to see what we're missing. I recently upgraded this cloud to Caracal. It seems like currently, only a user with the admin role has access. Searching for some hints, I found the deprecated policies in (everything is commented): /usr/share/openstack-dashboard/openstack_dashboard/conf/nova_policy.yaml And then the defaults here: /usr/share/openstack-dashboard/openstack_dashboard/conf/default_policies/nova.yaml In the code I found two checks for "os_compute_api:os-consoles:show": class ConsoleTab(policy.PolicyTargetMixin, tabs.Tab): name = _("Console") slug = "console" template_name = "project/instances/_detail_console.html" preload = False policy_rules = (("compute", "os_compute_api:os-consoles:show"),) class InstanceDetailTabs(policy.PolicyTargetMixin, tabs.DetailTabsGroup): slug = "instance_details" tabs = (OverviewTab, InterfacesTab, LogTab, ConsoleTab, AuditTab) sticky = True policy_rules = (("compute", "os_compute_api:os-consoles:show"),) from /usr/share/openstack-dashboard/openstack_dashboard/dashboards/project/instances/tabs.py. But I don't find any policy like that in the defaults. So I'm wondering what the current recommendation would be. Should I add only "os_compute_api:os-consoles:show" to /usr/share/openstack-dashboard/openstack_dashboard/conf/default_policies/nova.yaml? I'm not sure if that would override the other defaults (because of one entry only) or if this would be an additional policy (haven't been playing with those for some time now). Could anyone point me to the best approach? Thanks! Eugen

1 0

[Neutron] Bug deputy - summary from week of May 26th
by Sławek Kapłoński 02 Jun '25

02 Jun '25

Hi, I was bug deputy last week and here is short summary: ### Critical None ### High None ### Medium - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2111660 - OVN_AGENT_NEUTRON_SB_CFG_KEY doesn't set when Neutron OVN Agent starts - I marked it as Medium but I don't really have env to confirm it currently, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2111908 - [FT] ``test_subport_delete`` fails - fix proposed already by Rodolfo, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2112110 - [ovn-octavia-provider] LoadBalancer member not coming back after disable-enable - fix already proposed by Fernando, ### Low - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2112123 - Functional: privsep helper command exited non-zero test_trunk_creation_with_no_subports - opened by Lajos to track failiure with some functional test, ### RFE - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2111899 - [RFE] Use stateless NAT rules for FIPs - proposed by Rodolfo - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2111891 - IPv6 Subnet-Router anycast address inappropriately used for gateway_ip when specifying --subnet-range - unassigned, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2112297 - [RFE] Support Policy Based Routing for LRs in Neutron OVN driver ### To triage - https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-helm/+bug/2112130 - No port found in network None with IP address 169.254.169.254 - Brian already started looking into this, it seems for me that it is more OpenStack Helm issue rather than Neutron so I added Helm project to it too. -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat

1 0