Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers

On 18 August 2014 11:18, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Doug Hellmann wrote: >> On Aug 13, 2014, at 4:42 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: >>> Let me try to say it another way. You seemed to say that it wasn't much >>> to ask given the rate at which things happen in OpenStack. I would >>> argue that given the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

Going a bit further up the thread where we are still talking about spec reviews and not code reviews... On 28 August 2014 21:42, Dugger, Donald D wrote: > I would contend that that right there is an indication that there's a problem > with the process. We got two nova-core reviewer sponsors, to

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

On 28 August 2014 21:58, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 08/28/2014 02:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >> On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: >>> The overall "scheduler-lib" Blueprint is marked with a "high" priority >>> at "http://status.openstack.org/release/";. Hopefully that would apply >>> to sub

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

I think this is now more about code reviews, but this is important... On 29 August 2014 10:30, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:07:33AM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Joe Gordon wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh >> > mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.co

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] refactoring of resize/migrate

On 28 August 2014 09:50, Markus Zoeller wrote: > Jay Pipes wrote on 08/27/2014 08:57:08 PM: > >> From: Jay Pipes >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> Date: 08/27/2014 08:59 PM >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] refactoring of resize/migrate >> >> On 08/27/2014 06:41 AM, Markus Zoeller

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Kilo Specs Schedule

On 28 August 2014 23:53, Joe Gordon wrote: > We just finished discussing when to open up Kilo specs at the nova meeting > today [0], and Kilo specs will open right after we cut Juno RC1 (around Sept > 25th [1]). Additionally, the spec template will most likely be revised. > > We still have a huge

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?

efficient than long email threads, with slow replies. But I certainly want to respect everyones communication preferences. John > -Original Message- > From: John Garbutt [mailto:j...@johngarbutt.com] > Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 4:35 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing

Re: [openstack-dev] [vmware][nova] Refactor reseries rebased

A on 4 refactor > series patches. I made a note of who had approved them: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109754/ > Brian Elliott +2 > John Garbutt +2 +A > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109755/ > Daniel Berrange +2 > Andrew Laski +2 > John Garbutt +2 +A &

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

On 2 September 2014 19:16, Michael Still wrote: > We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Thierry's recent > email. I'd like to outline the process for requesting a freeze > exception: > > * your code must already be up for review > * your blueprint must have an approved spec >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

On 2 September 2014 21:36, Dan Genin wrote: > Just out of curiosity, what is the rational behind upping the number of core > sponsors for feature freeze exception to 3 if only two +2 are required to > merge? In Icehouse, IIRC, two core sponsors was deemed sufficient. We tried having 2 cores in th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

Sorry for another top post, but I like how Nikola has pulled this problem apart, and wanted to respond directly to his response. On 3 September 2014 10:50, Nikola Đipanov wrote: > The reason many features including my own may not make the FF is not > because there was not enough buy in from the c

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Averting the Nova crisis by splitting out virt drivers

On 4 September 2014 23:48, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 09/04/2014 06:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> Position statement >> == >> >> Over the past year I've increasingly come to the conclusion that >> Nova is heading for (or probably already at) a major crisis. If >> steps are no

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Averting the Nova crisis by splitting out virt drivers

On 5 September 2014 00:26, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote: >> >> Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a >> side effect of our effort to split out the scheduler will help but >> not solve this problem). > > > The difference between Dan

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] FFE request serial-ports

Blueprint restored, patches re-approved. Thanks, John On 5 September 2014 00:25, Michael Still wrote: > Approved. > > Michael > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: >> On 09/04/2014 02:42 PM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I would like to request a FFE for

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] FFE request v2-on-v3-api

ck.org/#/c/11/ >>> >>> They have all already been approved and were in the gate for a while >>> but just didn't quite make it through in time. So they shouldn't put any >>> load on reviewers. >>> >>> Sponsoring cores: >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [vmware][nova][FFE] vmware-spawn-refactor

Yeah, I have been reviewing these, so happy to sponsor them too. Patches have been re-approved. Thanks, John On 5 September 2014 00:23, Michael Still wrote: > So, that's your three. This exception is approved. > > Michael > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: >> On 09/04/20

[openstack-dev] [Nova] FFE flood gates open

Hi, We have now tagged juno-3, so we are good to approve patches for FFE now. Given how much there is to get through the gate, it would be nice to concentrate on FFE code, and higher priority bugs, till we break the back of those merges. Thanks, John

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [feature freeze exception] FFE for libvirt-start-lxc-from-block-devices

Blueprint re-approved, patches have -2 removed, now we are free to approve code again. Thanks, John On 4 September 2014 21:45, Michael Still wrote: > These look good to me, I will be your third core. The middle one has > some comments from Jay, but it didn't look like a big deal > > Approved. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [feature freeze exception] Feature freeze exception for config-drive-image-property

Blueprint re-approved, code re-approved. Thanks, John On 4 September 2014 21:11, Michael Still wrote: > I'll be the third core here. Approved. > > @John: can you please remove your -2 from this one? > > Michael > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 09/04/2014 03:35 PM, Jay

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] requesting an FFE for SRIOV

In the nova-meeting we agreed this gets a FFE, based on previous agreements in nova-meetings. Blueprint is approved for juno-rc1. Thanks, John On 4 September 2014 16:38, Nikola Đipanov wrote: > On 09/04/2014 05:16 PM, Dan Smith wrote: >>> The main sr-iov patches have gone through lots of code r

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][FFE] v3-api-schema

I am happy to sponsor this too. That makes three cores, so lets call this approved. Thanks, John On 5 September 2014 05:55, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: > 2014-09-04 22:36 GMT+09:00 Sean Dague : >> On 09/04/2014 09:30 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> I'd like to request FFE for patches o

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] libvirt version_cap, a postmortem

On 3 September 2014 21:57, Joe Gordon wrote: > On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: >> Hey >> >> The libvirt version_cap debacle continues to come up in conversation and >> one perception of the whole thing appears to be: >> >> A controversial patch was "ninjaed" by three Red

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

On 2 September 2014 20:23, Michael Still wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: >> On 09/02/2014 08:16 PM, Michael Still wrote: >>> Hi. >>> >>> We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Thierry's recent >>> email. I'd like to outline the process for requesting a fr

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][FFE] Feature freeze exception for virt-driver-numa-placement

On 5 September 2014 13:59, Nikola Đipanov wrote: > Since this did not get an 'Approved' as of yet, I want to make sure that > this is not because the number of sponsors. 2 core members have already > sponsored it, and as per [1] cores can sponsor their own FFEs so that's 3. While I am no fan of t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] List of granted FFEs

On 6 September 2014 15:32, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Michael Still wrote: >> I've built this handy dandy list of granted FFEs, because searching >> email to find out what is approved is horrible. It would be good if >> people with approved FFEs could check their thing is listed here: >> >> https

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] When is a blueprint unnecessary?

On 20 November 2013 10:21, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Russell Bryant wrote: >> One of the bits of feedback that came from the "Nova Project Structure >> and Process" session at the design summit was that it would be nice to >> skip having blueprints for smaller items. >> >> In an effort to capture th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Blueprint: standard specification of guest CPU topology

On 20 November 2013 10:19, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:18:24AM +0800, Wangpan wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> Thanks for your help in advance. >> I have read your wiki page and it explains this issue very clearly. >> But I have a question about the 'technical design', you giv

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] future fate of nova-network?

>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: In particular, has there been a decision made about whether it will definitely be deprecated in some (as yet unspecified) future release, or whether it will continue to be supported for the foreseeable future? >>> >>> We want

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] V3 API Review Checklist and style guide

On 19 November 2013 11:40, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > I've updated the Nova review check list with some details for reviewing V3 > API changesets and started a bit of a style guide for the API. > > Checklist: > https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=ReviewChecklist#Nova_Review_Checklist Look

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On 16 December 2013 15:25, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 06:58:24AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: >> Hi, >> At the moment the administrator is able to retrieve diagnostics for a >> running VM. Currently the implementation is very loosely defined, that is, >> each driver returns

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network support

Apologies for being late onto this thread, and not making the meeting the other day. Also apologies this is almost totally a top post. On 17 December 2013 15:09, Ian Wells wrote: > Firstly, I disagree that > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PCI_passthrough_SRIOV_support is an accurate > reflection

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Future meeting times

+1 to 14:00 meeting, I can always make those. I can probably make some of the 21:00 meetings But probably only in the summer when its UTC+1 over here. John On 19 December 2013 07:49, Day, Phil wrote: > +1, I would make the 14:00 meeting. I often have good intention of making the > 21:00 meeting

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network support

On 19 December 2013 12:21, Ian Wells wrote: > > John: >> >> At a high level: >> >> Neutron: >> * user wants to connect to a particular neutron network >> * user wants a super-fast SRIOV connection >> >> Administration: >> * needs to map PCI device to what neutron network the connect to >> >> The b

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network support

On 19 December 2013 12:54, John Garbutt wrote: > On 19 December 2013 12:21, Ian Wells wrote: >> >> John: >>> >>> At a high level: >>> >>> Neutron: >>> * user wants to connect to a particular neutron network >>> * user wants a s

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network support

t; related use cases. > Please see my comments inline. Cool. > Regards, > Irena > -----Original Message- > From: John Garbutt [mailto:j...@johngarbutt.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 1:42 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subje

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Docker] Environment variables

On 17 December 2013 12:53, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:04:33PM -0800, Dan Smith wrote: >> > eg use a 'env_' prefix for glance image attributes >> > >> > We've got a couple of cases now where we want to overrides these >> > same things on a per-instance basis. Kernel comm

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] VM diagnostics - V3 proposal

On 16 December 2013 15:50, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 03:37:39PM +0000, John Garbutt wrote: >> On 16 December 2013 15:25, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 06:58:24AM -0800, Gary Kotton wrote: >> >> I'd like to p

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do we have some guidelines for mock, stub, mox when writing unit test?

On 4 December 2013 17:10, Russell Bryant wrote: > I think option 3 makes the most sense here (pending anyone saying we > should run away screaming from mox3 for some reason). It's actually > what I had been assuming since this thread a while back. > > This means that we don't need to *require* th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][BluePrint Register] Shrink the volume when file in the instance was deleted.

On 25 December 2013 05:14, Qixiaozhen wrote: > Hi,all > > A blueprint is registered that is about shrinking the volume in thin > provision. Have you got the link? > Thin provision means allocating the disk space once the instance writes the > data on the area of volume in the first time. > > How

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network support

On 22 December 2013 12:07, Irena Berezovsky wrote: > Hi Ian, > > My comments are inline > > I would like to suggest to focus the next PCI-pass though IRC meeting on: > > 1.Closing the administration and tenant that powers the VM use > cases. > > 2. Decouple the nova and neutron part

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do we have some guidelines for mock, stub, mox when writing unit test?

On 21 December 2013 13:24, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 12/19/2013 8:51 AM, John Garbutt wrote: >> >> On 4 December 2013 17:10, Russell Bryant wrote: >>> >>> I think option 3 makes the most sense here (pending anyone saying we >>> should run

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Nova][cold migration] Why we need confirm resize after cold migration

On 8 January 2014 10:02, David Xie wrote: > In nova/compute/api.py#2289, function resize, there's a parameter named > flavor_id, if it is None, it is considered as cold migration. Thus, nova > should skip resize verifying. However, it doesn't. > > Like Jay said, we should skip this step during col

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][turbo hipster] unable to rebase

On 8 January 2014 12:07, Gary Kotton wrote: > Hi, > Patch sets that are cascaded has have the following errors: > > "Database migration testing failed either due to migrations unable to be > applied correctly or taking too long. > > This change was unable to be automatically merged with the curren

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Nova][cold migration] Why we need confirm resize after cold migration

On 8 January 2014 15:29, Jay Lau wrote: > 2014/1/8 John Garbutt >> >> On 8 January 2014 10:02, David Xie wrote: >> > In nova/compute/api.py#2289, function resize, there's a parameter named >> > flavor_id, if it is None, it is considered as cold migrati

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] PCI pass-through network support

Apologies for this top post, I just want to move this discussion towards action. I am traveling next week so it is unlikely that I can make the meetings. Sorry. Can we please agree on some concrete actions, and who will do the coding? This also means raising new blueprints for each item of work.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] bp proposal: discovery of peer instances through metadata service

On 27 January 2014 14:52, Justin Santa Barbara wrote: > Day, Phil wrote: > >> >> >> We already have a mechanism now where an instance can push metadata as >> >> a way of Windows instances sharing their passwords - so maybe this >> >> could >> >> build on that somehow - for example each instance pu

Re: [openstack-dev] Nova style cleanups with associated hacking check addition

On 27 January 2014 10:10, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:42:54AM -0500, Joe Gordon wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange >> wrote: >> >> > Periodically I've seen people submit big coding style cleanups to Nova >> > code. These are typically all good

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] PCI pass-through SRIOV on Jan. 28th

On 27 January 2014 21:36, Ian Wells wrote: > Live migration for the first release is intended to be covered by macvtap, > in my mind - direct mapped devices have limited support in hypervisors aiui. > It seemed we had a working theory for that, which we test out and see if > it's going to work. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Discuss the option delete_on_termination

On 26 January 2014 09:23, 黎林果 wrote: > Hi, > > I have started the implementation, Please review. Address: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/67067/ > > Thanks. > > Regards, > Lee Hi lee, I have added the same comments as Christopher to the blueprint. Please look at updating the blueprint's mile

Re: [openstack-dev] Proposal for instance-level snapshots in Nova

On 24 January 2014 17:05, Jon Bernard wrote: > * Vishvananda Ishaya wrote: >> >> On Jan 16, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Jon Bernard wrote: >> >> > * Vishvananda Ishaya wrote: >> >> >> >> On Jan 14, 2014, at 2:10 PM, Jon Bernard wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> As you've defined the feature so far, it

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Bug Triage Day Proposal - Friday 7th February

Hi, Now that we getting close towards the end of Icehouse, it seems a good time to make sure we tame the un-triaged bug backlog (try say that really quickly a few times over), and look at what really needs fixing before Icehouse is released. I propose that we have a bug triage day this Friday, Fe

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] os-migrateLive not working with neutron in Havana (or apparently Grizzly)

On 4 February 2014 19:16, Jonathan Proulx wrote: > HI all, > > Trying to get a little love on bug > https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1227836 > > Short version is the instance migrates, but there's an RPC time out > that keeps nova thinking it's still on the old node mid-migration. > Informal

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Bug Triage Day Proposal - Friday 7th February

gt; On 02/04/2014 05:10 PM, John Garbutt wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Now that we getting close towards the end of Icehouse, it seems a good >> time to make sure we tame the un-triaged bug backlog (try say that >> really quickly a few times over), and look at what really ne

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Bug Triage Day Proposal - Friday 7th February

:12, John Garbutt wrote: > Just a quick reminder, its bug day! > > Lets collaborate in #openstack-nova > > We can track progress here: > http://webnumbr.com/untouched-nova-bugs > And later progress: > http://status.openstack.org/bugday > > Get those bugs tagged: > h

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Nova feature proposal freeze has passed

Hi, Lets keep track of things for Nova here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-icehouse-blueprint-cull In a few hours I will start reviewing all the blueprints that are not "Needs Code Review" and pushing them into "next". Anything with some "live" code will probably go into Juno-1, if that m

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] v3 API in Icehouse

On 20 February 2014 14:55, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 08:22:57 -0500 > Sean Dague wrote: >> >> We're also duplicating a lot of test and review energy in having 2 API >> stacks. Even before v3 has come out of experimental it's consumed a >> huge amount of review resource on both

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Simulating many fake nova compute nodes for scheduler testing

On 24 February 2014 16:24, David Peraza wrote: > Hello all, > > I have been trying some new ideas on scheduler and I think I'm reaching a > resource issue. I'm running 6 compute service right on my 4 CPU 4 Gig VM, > and I started to get some memory allocation issues. Keystone and Nova are > alread

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Future of the Nova API

On 24 February 2014 18:11, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 2/24/2014 10:13 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: >> >> On 02/24/2014 01:50 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> There has recently been some speculation around the V3 API and whether >>> we should go forward with it or instead backport

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Future of the Nova API

On 25 February 2014 06:11, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:37:04 -0800 > Dan Smith wrote: > >> > onSharedStorage = True >> > on_shared_storage = False >> >> This is a good example. I'm not sure it's worth breaking users _or_ >> introducing a new microversion for something like th

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Future of the Nova API

On 25 February 2014 09:44, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 21:15:30 -0500 > Russell Bryant wrote: > >> CC'ing the openstack-operators mailing list to get a wider set of >> feedback on this question. >> >> On 02/24/2014 05:26 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: >> >> 1) Continue as we have b

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][VMWare] VMware VM snapshot

On 25 February 2014 09:27, Qin Zhao wrote: > Hi, > > One simple question about VCenter driver. I feel the VM snapshot function of > VCenter is very useful and is loved by VCenter users. Does anybody think > about to let VCenter driver support it? It depends if that can be modelled well with the c

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Simulating many fake nova compute nodes for scheduler testing

e move to conductor work should certainly stop the scheduler making those pesky DB calls to update the nova instance. And then, improvements like no-db-scheduler and improvements to scheduling algorithms should shine through much more. Thanks, John > -Original Message- > From: John

Re: [openstack-dev] Nova Bug Scrub meeting

On 25 February 2014 02:35, Tracy Jones wrote: > Hi all - i have set up the nova bug scrub meeting for Wednesdays at 1630 UTC > in the #openstack-meeting-3 IRC channel > > The first meeting will be all about triaging the 117 un-triaged bugs (here). Thanks for setting this up. I would rather we us

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] why doesn't _rollback_live_migration() always call rollback_live_migration_at_destination()?

On 24 February 2014 22:14, Chris Friesen wrote: > I'm looking at the live migration rollback code and I'm a bit confused. > > When setting up a live migration we unconditionally run > ComputeManager.pre_live_migration() on the destination host to do various > things including setting up networks o

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] why doesn't _rollback_live_migration() always call rollback_live_migration_at_destination()?

On 25 February 2014 15:44, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 02/25/2014 05:15 AM, John Garbutt wrote: >> >> On 24 February 2014 22:14, Chris Friesen >> wrote: > > > >>> What happens if we have a shared-storage instance that we try to migrate >>> and >&g

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Tracking Kilo priorities

On 20 November 2014 09:32, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 20/11/14 20:17 +1100, Michael Still wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> as discussed at the summit, we want to do a better job of tracking the >> progress of work on our priorities for Kilo. To that end, we have >> agreed to discuss the current state of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Tracking Kilo priorities

On 20 November 2014 09:25, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > Le 20/11/2014 10:17, Michael Still a écrit : >> >> Hi, >> >> as discussed at the summit, we want to do a better job of tracking the >> progress of work on our priorities for Kilo. To that end, we have >> agreed to discuss the current state of the

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Kilo Release Status - just passed spec freeze

Hi all, With the release of kilo-1 we have frozen the approval of new specs for kilo. This is to make sure we can focus on our agreed kilo priorities: http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/priorities/kilo-priorities.html As always, there are exceptions, here is how: 1) email ML, "[nov

[openstack-dev] [nova] Kilo FeatureProposalFreeze 22nd Jan and FeatureFreeze 5th Feb

Hi, In kilo we agreed to focus more on stability and technical debt related work. As such... If your code is *not* on this list of kilo priorities: http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/priorities/kilo-priorities.html Then the following dates apply (as previously announced)... 22nd Ja

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][service group]improve host state detection

On 28 April 2014 13:30, Jiangying (Jenny) wrote: > Nova now can detect host unreachable. But it fails to make out host > isolation, host dead and nova compute service down. When host unreachable is > reported, users have to find out the exact state by himself and then take > the appropriate measur

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] SR-IOV nova-specs

Hey, -2 has been removed, feel free to ping me in IRC if you need quicker turn around, been traveling last few days. Thanks, John On 27 May 2014 19:21, Robert Li (baoli) wrote: > Hi John, > > Now that we have agreement during the summit on how to proceed in order to > get it in to Juno, please

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Juno-1 Push and the J-1 (Soft)FeatureProposalFreeze

Hi, Juno-1 release date is now less than two weeks away: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Juno_Release_Schedule In this weeks nova-meeting we decided to apply a kind of FeatureProposalFreeze for Juno-1. And that means... Reviewers (thats everyone!) = 1) Please lets give conc

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

On 3 June 2014 14:29, Jay Pipes wrote: > tl;dr > = > > Move CPU and RAM allocation ratio definition out of the Nova scheduler and > into the resource tracker. Remove the calculations for overcommit out of the > core_filter and ram_filter scheduler pieces. +1 I hope to see us send more specif

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Diagnostics spec

We have stopped reviewing specs (at least that was the plan), to get Juno-1 out the door before Thursday. Hopefully on Friday, it will be full steam ahead with nova-specs reviews. John On 10 June 2014 09:44, Gary Kotton wrote: > Hi, > Any chance of getting a review on https://review.openstack.o

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation scheduler filter - bug, or new feature proposal?

There was a spec I read that was related to this idea of excluding things that don't match the filter. I can't seem to find that, but the general idea makes total sense. As a heads up, the scheduler split means we are wanting to change how the aggregate filters are working, more towards this direc

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][ceilometer] FloatingIp pollster spamming n-api logs (bug 1328694)

On 11 June 2014 20:07, Joe Gordon wrote: > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Matt Riedemann > wrote: >> On 6/11/2014 10:01 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: >>> Thanks for bringing this to the list Matt, comments inline ... >>> tl;dr: some pervasive changes were made to nova to enable polling in

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][QA] Disabling the v3 API tests in the gate

On 12 June 2014 17:10, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/12/2014 12:02 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> >> >> On 6/12/2014 10:51 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:41:19AM +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote: On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Dan Smith wrote: > I think it'd be

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Nominating Ken'ichi Ohmichi for nova-core

> On 06/14/2014 12:40 AM, Michael Still wrote: >> Greetings, >> >> I would like to nominate Ken'ichi Ohmichi for the nova-core team. >> >> Ken'ichi has been involved with nova for a long time now. His reviews >> on API changes are excellent, and he's been part of the team that has >> driven the ne

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Review guidelines for API patches

On 14 June 2014 00:48, Michael Still wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann >> wrote: >>> On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do any hyperviors allow disk reduction as part of resize ?

So I am +1 deprecating resize down, mostly for consistency reasons. On 16 June 2014 10:34, Day, Phil wrote: > Beyond what is and isn’t technically possible at the file system level there > is always the problem that the user may have more data than can fit into the > reduced disk. > > I don’t wan

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Question about modifying instance attribute(such as cpu-QoS, disk-QoS ) without shutdown the instance

I have seem some work and specs around this here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/hot-resize Hope that helps, John On 8 April 2014 17:45, Trump.Zhang wrote: > Such as QoS attributes of vCPU, Memory and Disk, including IOPS limit, > Bandwidth limit, etc. > > > 2014-04-08 23:04 GMT+08:

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to merge blueprints that just missed Icehouse-3 in early Juno-1

On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant wrote: > Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for > blueprints not already merged will need a feature freeze exception (FFE) > to be considered for Icehouse. > > In addition to evaluation the request in terms of risks and benefits, I >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to merge blueprints that just missed Icehouse-3 in early Juno-1

On 6 March 2014 10:51, John Garbutt wrote: > On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant wrote: >> Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for >> blueprints not already merged will need a feature freeze exception (FFE) >> to be considered for Icehouse.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Concrete Proposal for Keeping V2 API

On 5 March 2014 03:44, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > But this plan is certainly something I'm happy to support. +1 On 5 March 2014 03:44, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > So I think this a good compromise to keep things moving. Some aspects > that we'll need to consider: > > - We need more tempest coverag

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to merge blueprints that just missed Icehouse-3 in early Juno-1

On 6 March 2014 11:31, Sean Dague wrote: > On 03/06/2014 05:51 AM, John Garbutt wrote: >> On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant wrote: >>> Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for >>> blueprints not already merged will need a feature freez

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] FFE Request: ISO support for the VMware driver

BP: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack/?searchtext=vmware-iso-boot >>> Code: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/63084/ and >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/77965/ >>> Sponsors: John Garbutt and Nikola Dipanov >>> >>> One of the things that we are plannin

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Feature about volume delete protection

On 6 March 2014 08:50, zhangyu (AI) wrote: > It seems to be an interesting idea. In fact, a China-based public IaaS, > QingCloud, has provided a similar feature > to their virtual servers. Within 2 hours after a virtual server is deleted, > the server owner can decide whether > or not to cancel

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Simulating many fake nova compute nodes for scheduler testing

et the move to conductor work complete (using select destination instead of run_instance), the DB calls locking all the eventlet threads seems like the biggest issue. Anyways, looking forward to a good discussion at the summit. John > > Regards, > David Peraza > > -Original Mes

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] [Nova] Status of the nova "ironic" driver and CI

On 9 March 2014 16:04, Devananda van der Veen wrote: > With the feature freeze in effect and our driver blocked from the Nova tree > for this release cycle, last week we moved our driver into the Ironic tree > in this patch set: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/78002/ > > This allows Nova to l

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to merge blueprints that just missed Icehouse-3 in early Juno-1

On 7 March 2014 20:57, Joe Gordon wrote: > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:51 AM, John Garbutt wrote: >> >> On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant wrote: >> > Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release. Patches for >> > blueprints not already merged will nee

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Concrete Proposal for Keeping V2 API

On 6 March 2014 13:18, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 10:24 PM, John Garbutt wrote: >> >> On 5 March 2014 03:44, Christopher Yeoh wrote: >> > But this plan is certainly something I'm happy to support. >> >> One extra thing we need to

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] RFC - using Gerrit for Nova Blueprint review & approval

On 6 March 2014 19:09, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 03/06/2014 01:05 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> One of the issues that the Nova team has definitely hit is >> Blueprint overload. At some point there were over 150 blueprints. >> Many of them were a single sentence. >> >> The results of this have been th

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] RFC - using Gerrit for Nova Blueprint review & approval

On 7 March 2014 19:50, Tim Bell wrote: > > The recent operator gathering > (https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/operators-feedback-mar14) concluded a > similar proposal, based on Blueprint-on-Blueprints (BoB for short). > > The aim was that operators of production OpenStack clouds should engage to

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [bug?] live migration fails with boot-from-volume

On 10 March 2014 18:54, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 03/08/2014 02:23 AM, ChangBo Guo wrote: >> >> Are you using libvirt driver ? >> As I remember, the way to check if compute nodes with shared storage >> is : create a temporary file from source node , then check the file >> from dest node , b

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] An analysis of code review in Nova

On 13 March 2014 10:09, Matthew Booth wrote: > On 12/03/14 18:28, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> On 2/25/2014 6:36 AM, Matthew Booth wrote: >>> I'm new to Nova. After some frustration with the review process, >>> specifically in the VMware driver, I decided to try to visualise how the >>> review process

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] question about e41fb84 "fix anti-affinity race condition on boot"

On 15 March 2014 18:39, Chris Friesen wrote: > Hi, > > I'm curious why the specified git commit chose to fix the anti-affinity race > condition by aborting the boot and triggering a reschedule. > > It seems to me that it would have been more elegant for the scheduler to do > a database transaction

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] question about e41fb84 "fix anti-affinity race condition on boot"

On 17 March 2014 17:54, John Garbutt wrote: > On 15 March 2014 18:39, Chris Friesen wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm curious why the specified git commit chose to fix the anti-affinity race >> condition by aborting the boot and triggering a reschedule. >> >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler] Availability Zones and Host aggregates..

Sounds like an extra weighter to try and balance load between your two AZs might be a nicer way to go. The easiest way might be via cells, one for each AZ . But not sure we merged that support yet. But there are patches for that. John On 25 Mar 2014 20:53, "Sangeeta Singh" wrote: > Hi, > > Th

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev][Nova][VMWare] Enable live migration with one nova compute

On 31 March 2014 10:11, Jay Lau wrote: > Hi, > > Currently with VMWare VCDriver, one nova compute can manage multiple > clusters/RPs, this caused cluster admin cannot do live migration between > clusters/PRs if those clusters/PRs managed by one nova compute as the > current live migration logic re

[openstack-dev] [Nova] PTL Candidacy

o understand and support that. In addition, we would have an open understanding of what parts of Nova are well maintained. Thanks for reading! John Garbutt @johnthetubaguy ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

  1   2   3   4   5   >