Open Stack

Thanks for your explicit explanations，I even misunderstand(maybe
superficial understand) the intentions of the random IP when I set up this
thread :)

Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrachys at redhat.com>于2016年10月19日周三 上午12:05写道：

> (To clarify for those not part of the neutron dev team, ‘fullstack’ in
> neutron gate is not devstack/tempest, and does not involve other openstack
> services, or multiple nodes.)
>
> No, we don’t dump a seed. I don’t think I saw a ‘fullstack’ failure that
> required an exact environment duplication to reproduce a test failure.
>
> For neutron ‘fullstack’ tests, we run complete neutron services, and
> collect all their logs, per test scenario. Basically, every ‘fullstack’
> test case is a tiny openstack setup with just neutron services running,
> using some common resources like amqp bus, or ovs bridge emulating physical
> infrastructure. As long as service logs are sufficient to debug failures,
> it doesn’t differ much from any other failure in neutron f.e. in tempest.
>
> It’s common for neutron to allocate a ‘random’ address from a subnet
> allocation pool for its network and instance ports, in which case we need
> to trace port-ids and whatnot to link related server/agent/tempest logs.
> (If you ask me why we randomize ip address allocation in neutron IPAM code,
> that’s actually for a reason, to reduce database contention when allocating
> addresses for parallel port requests).
>
> Ihar
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20161019/3e0a8605/attachment.html>