From: Vishvananda Ishaya [mailto:vishvana...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 9:41 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to revert per-user-quotas


On Aug 20, 2013, at 9:02 AM, Yingjun Li 
<liyingjun1...@gmail.com<mailto:liyingjun1...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Thanks for address the issues. About the bad state for fixed_ips, floating_ips, 
i think we could make the user_id column=NULL when creating the quota usage and 
reservation, so the usages for fixed_ips and floating_ips will be  synced 
within the project.
Does this make sense?

If this is a viable approach, I prefer that we attempt to fix the code in tree. 
We attempted to get this code in grizzly and had to revert. I'd hate to go 
through the cycle again in I if we can fix it now.

[Gary Kotton] I too prefer this approach.

Vish


2013/8/20 Andrew Laski 
<andrew.la...@rackspace.com<mailto:andrew.la...@rackspace.com>>
The patch in question (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28232/24) adds the 
ability to track quota usage on a per user basis within a project.  I have run 
into two issues with it so far: the db migration is incomplete and leaves the 
data in a bad state, and the sync methods used during quota reservations no 
longer work for fixed_ips, floating_ips, and networks since they are not tied 
to a user.

The db migration issue is documented at 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1212798 but the tl;dr is that the quota 
usages that were in place before the migration is run can not be decremented 
and aren't fixed by the healing sync that occurs.  I sought to address this by 
introducing a new migration which performs a full sync of quota usages and 
removes the bad rows but that led me to the next issue.

Some resources can't be synced properly because they're tracked per user in the 
quota table but they're not tied to a user so it's not feasible to grab a count 
of how many are being used by any particular user.  So right now the 
quota_usages table can get into a bad state with no good way to address it.

Right now I think it will be better to revert this change and re-introduce it 
once these issues are worked out. Thoughts?

As an addendum, the patch merged about a month ago on Jul 25th and looks to 
have some minor conflicts for a revert but should be minimally disruptive.

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to