Open Stack

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 3:22 AM melanie witt <melwittt at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 17:46:15 -0700, Melanie Witt <melwittt at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:32:57 -0500, Matt Riedemann <mriedemos at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On 4/16/2019 7:22 PM, melanie witt wrote:
> >>> Today, an ERROR instance that has never been scheduled will consume
> >>> cores and ram quota usage
> >>
> >> Hmm, I wonder if that was also a regression in Pike with counting
> >> quotas. Because that usage is not real and arguably shouldn't count
> >> against the tenant.
> >
> > I don't think so, based on hazy anecdotal experience and a look at the
> > code which does a quota reservation before scheduling and doesn't appear
> > to rollback quota in any failure case in conductor:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/stable/ocata/nova/compute/api.py#L313
> >
> > I still have my Ocata devstack up, so I'll do a test and reply with the
> > results for Ocata, Train, and Train + counting from placement.
>
> Here are the results:
>
> * Ocata behavior, unscheduled ERROR instance consumes quota usage for
> instances, cores, and ram: http://paste.openstack.org/show/749406
>
> * Train behavior, unscheduled ERROR instance consumes quota usage for
> instances, cores, and ram: http://paste.openstack.org/show/749407
>
> * Train behavior + counting from placement, consumes quota usage for
> instances (API database) but not for cores and ram (placement
> allocations): http://paste.openstack.org/show/749408
>
>
I guess this would be the expected/needed behaviour right? That is we count
the instance but don't count the RAM and cores. Maybe we should fix this
for the stable branches also in the current way of counting.

-- 

Regards,
Surya.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190417/8a0693de/attachment.html>