On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Matt Joyce <m...@nycresistor.com> wrote:
> Wondering if heat should be performing this orchestration. > I wouldn't expect heat to have access to everything that needs to be cleaned up. > > Would provide for a more pluggable front end to the action set. > > -matt > > On Feb 25, 2015 2:37 PM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Tim Bell <tim.b...@cern.ch> wrote: > >> > >> > >> A few inline comments and a general point > >> > >> How do we handle scenarios like volumes when we have a per-component > janitor rather than a single co-ordinator ? > >> > >> To be clean, > >> > >> 1. nova should shutdown the instance > >> 2. nova should then ask the volume to be detached > >> 3. cinder could then perform the 'project deletion' action as > configured by the operator (such as shelve or backup) > >> 4. nova could then perform the 'project deletion' action as configured > by the operator (such as VM delete or shelve) > >> > >> If we have both cinder and nova responding to a single message, cinder > would do 3. Immediately and nova would be doing the shutdown which is > likely to lead to a volume which could not be shelved cleanly. > >> > >> The problem I see with messages is that co-ordination of the actions > may require ordering between the components. The disable/enable cases > would show this in a worse scenario. > > > > > > You raise two good points. > > > > * How to clean something up may be different for different clouds > > * Some cleanup operations have to happen in a specific order > > > > Not sure what the best way to address those two points is. Perhaps the > best way forward is a openstack-specs spec to hash out these details. > > > > > >> > >> Tim > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Ian Cordasco [mailto:ian.corda...@rackspace.com] > >> > Sent: 19 February 2015 17:49 > >> > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Joe > Gordon > >> > Cc: openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org > >> > Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] Resources owned by > a > >> > project/tenant are not cleaned up after that project is deleted from > keystone > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On 2/2/15, 15:41, "Morgan Fainberg" <morgan.fainb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > > >> > >On February 2, 2015 at 1:31:14 PM, Joe Gordon (joe.gord...@gmail.com > ) > >> > >wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Morgan Fainberg > >> > ><morgan.fainb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >I think the simple answer is "yes". We (keystone) should emit > >> > >notifications. And yes other projects should listen. > >> > > > >> > >The only thing really in discussion should be: > >> > > > >> > >1: soft delete or hard delete? Does the service mark it as orphaned, > or > >> > >just delete (leave this to nova, cinder, etc to discuss) > >> > > > >> > >2: how to cleanup when an event is missed (e.g rabbit bus goes out to > >> > >lunch). > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >I disagree slightly, I don't think projects should directly listen to > >> > >the Keystone notifications I would rather have the API be something > >> > >from a keystone owned library, say keystonemiddleware. So something > like > >> > this: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >from keystonemiddleware import janitor > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >keystone_janitor = janitor.Janitor() > >> > >keystone_janitor.register_callback(nova.tenant_cleanup) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >keystone_janitor.spawn_greenthread() > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >That way each project doesn't have to include a lot of boilerplate > >> > >code, and keystone can easily modify/improve/upgrade the notification > >> > mechanism. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> > >> I assume janitor functions can be used for > >> > >> - enable/disable project > >> - enable/disable user > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >Sure. I’d place this into an implementation detail of where that > >> > >actually lives. I’d be fine with that being a part of Keystone > >> > >Middleware Package (probably something separate from auth_token). > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >—Morgan > >> > > > >> > > >> > I think my only concern is what should other projects do and how much > do we > >> > want to allow operators to configure this? I can imagine it being > preferable to > >> > have safe (without losing much data) policies for this as a default > and to allow > >> > operators to configure more destructive policies as part of deploying > certain > >> > services. > >> > > >> > >> Depending on the cloud, an operator could want different semantics for > delete project's impact, between delete or 'shelve' style or maybe disable. > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >--Morgan > >> > > > >> > >Sent via mobile > >> > > > >> > >> On Feb 2, 2015, at 10:16, Matthew Treinish <mtrein...@kortar.org> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 11:46:53AM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: > >> > >>> This came up in the operators mailing list back in June [1] but > >> > >>>given the subject probably didn't get much attention. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Basically there is a really old bug [2] from Grizzly that is > still a > >> > >>>problem and affects multiple projects. A tenant can be deleted in > >> > >>>Keystone even though other resources in other projects are under > >> > >>>that project, and those resources aren't cleaned up. > >> > >> > >> > >> I agree this probably can be a major pain point for users. We've > had > >> > >>to work around it in tempest by creating things like: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/tree/tempest/cmd/cleanu > >> > >p_s > >> > >ervice.py > >> > >< > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/tree/tempest/cmd/clean > >> > >up_ > >> > >service.py> > >> > >> and > >> > >> > >> > > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/tree/tempest/cmd/cleanu > >> > >p.p > >> > >y > >> > >< > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tempest/tree/tempest/cmd/cleanup > >> > . > >> > >py> > >> > >> > >> > >> to ensure we aren't dangling resources after a run. But, this > doesn't > >> > >>work in all cases either. (like with tenant isolation enabled) > >> > >> > >> > >> I also know there is a stackforge project that is attempting > >> > >>something similar > >> > >> here: > >> > >> > >> > >> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/stackforge/ospurge/ > >> > >> > >> > >> It would be much nicer if the burden for doing this was taken off > >> > >>users and this was just handled cleanly under the covers. > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Keystone implemented event notifications back in Havana [3] but > the > >> > >>>other projects aren't listening on them to know when a project has > >> > >>>been deleted and act accordingly. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> The bug has several people saying "we should talk about this at > the > >> > >>>summit" > >> > >>> for several summits, but I can't find any discussion or summit > >> > >>>sessions related back to the bug. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Given this is an operations and cross-project issue, I'd like to > >> > >>>bring it up again for the Vancouver summit if there is still > >> > >>>interest (which I'm assuming there is from operators). > >> > >> > >> > >> I'd definitely support having a cross-project session on this. > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> There is a blueprint specifically for the tenant deletion case but > >> > >>> it's targeted at only Horizon [4]. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Is anyone still working on this? Is there sufficient interest in a > >> > >>> cross-project session at the L summit? > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Thinking out loud, even if nova doesn't listen to events from > >> > >>>keystone, we could at least have a periodic task that looks for > >> > >>>instances where the tenant no longer exists in keystone and then > >> > >>>take some action (log a warning, shutdown/archive/, reap, etc). > >> > >>> > >> > >>> There is also a spec for L to transfer instance ownership [5] > which > >> > >>>could maybe come into play, but I wouldn't depend on it. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> [1] > >> > > > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2014-June/004559. > >> > >html > >> > >< > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2014-June/004 > >> > >559 > >> > >.html> > >> > >>> [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/967832 > >> > >>> [3] > >> > >https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/notifications > >> > ><https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/notifications> > >> > >>> [4] > >> > >https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/tenant-deletion > >> > ><https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/tenant-deletion> > >> > >>> [5] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105367/ > >> > >> > >> > >> -Matt Treinish > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > >> OpenStack-operators mailing list > >> > >> openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org > >> > >> > >> > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators > >> > >< > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operator > >> > >s> > >> > > > >> > >_______________________________________________ > >> > >OpenStack-operators mailing list > >> > >openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org > >> > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > OpenStack-operators mailing list > >> > openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org > >> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev