Bug 1261092 - Rbd backend doesn't support disk IO qos
Summary: Rbd backend doesn't support disk IO qos
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenStack
Classification: Red Hat
Component: openstack-nova
Version: 8.0 (Liberty)
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
high
Target Milestone: beta
: 8.0 (Liberty)
Assignee: Eoghan Glynn
QA Contact: Yogev Rabl
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1262069
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-09-08 14:44 UTC by Stephen Gordon
Modified: 2019-09-09 16:31 UTC (History)
12 users (show)

Fixed In Version: openstack-nova-12.0.0-1.el7ost
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-04-07 21:07:30 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Launchpad 1405367 0 None None None Never
Red Hat Product Errata RHEA-2016:0603 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Red Hat OpenStack Platform 8 Enhancement Advisory 2016-04-08 00:53:53 UTC

Description Stephen Gordon 2015-09-08 14:44:54 UTC
Cloned from launchpad bug 1405367.

Description:

Honor https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/InstanceResourceQuota#IO_limits by propagating
the extra_specs also in the RBD sub-class.

Specification URL (additional information):

https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1405367

Comment 3 Yogev Rabl 2015-11-23 09:10:59 UTC
verified in version 
openstack-nova-api-12.0.0-2.el7ost.noarch
openstack-nova-compute-12.0.0-2.el7ost.noarch

Comment 4 Stephen Gordon 2015-12-04 16:56:03 UTC
Hi Yogev,

Can you confirm this is now part of the automation suite?
Thanks,

Steve

Comment 5 Yogev Rabl 2015-12-06 08:54:39 UTC
Hi Steve,

This test is not a part of the automation suite yet. This test requires some manual handling in order to monitor the I/O of the instances.

Comment 6 Stephen Gordon 2015-12-11 17:28:19 UTC
(In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #5)
> Hi Steve,
> 
> This test is not a part of the automation suite yet. This test requires some
> manual handling in order to monitor the I/O of the instances.

Is there anything we can do about this? A key metric for the OSP-8 release is that features be tested via automation, otherwise we can't call them out. This is to ensure that we also regression test this functionality in future releases.

Comment 7 Yogev Rabl 2015-12-13 11:51:41 UTC
(In reply to Stephen Gordon from comment #6)
> (In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #5)
> > Hi Steve,
> > 
> > This test is not a part of the automation suite yet. This test requires some
> > manual handling in order to monitor the I/O of the instances.
> 
> Is there anything we can do about this? A key metric for the OSP-8 release
> is that features be tested via automation, otherwise we can't call them out.
> This is to ensure that we also regression test this functionality in future
> releases.

We can set all the necessary requirements for this feature and check they are configured in the VM's XML configuration file and trust KVM to work properly. 

I wounldn't be happy with that test, but if you'd like I can set this test in the Acceptance test plan for Ceph integration with Openstack and test it every major version/release candidate.

Is this agreeable?

Comment 8 Stephen Gordon 2015-12-18 19:01:22 UTC
(In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #7)
> (In reply to Stephen Gordon from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #5)
> > > Hi Steve,
> > > 
> > > This test is not a part of the automation suite yet. This test requires some
> > > manual handling in order to monitor the I/O of the instances.
> > 
> > Is there anything we can do about this? A key metric for the OSP-8 release
> > is that features be tested via automation, otherwise we can't call them out.
> > This is to ensure that we also regression test this functionality in future
> > releases.
> 
> We can set all the necessary requirements for this feature and check they
> are configured in the VM's XML configuration file and trust KVM to work
> properly. 
> 
> I wounldn't be happy with that test, but if you'd like I can set this test
> in the Acceptance test plan for Ceph integration with Openstack and test it
> every major version/release candidate.
> 
> Is this agreeable?

Yes, this seems appropriate. Responsibility for regression testing of KVM itself really falls to Virt QE.

Comment 9 Yogev Rabl 2015-12-20 12:21:34 UTC
(In reply to Stephen Gordon from comment #8)
> (In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Stephen Gordon from comment #6)
> > > (In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #5)
> > > > Hi Steve,
> > > > 
> > > > This test is not a part of the automation suite yet. This test requires some
> > > > manual handling in order to monitor the I/O of the instances.
> > > 
> > > Is there anything we can do about this? A key metric for the OSP-8 release
> > > is that features be tested via automation, otherwise we can't call them out.
> > > This is to ensure that we also regression test this functionality in future
> > > releases.
> > 
> > We can set all the necessary requirements for this feature and check they
> > are configured in the VM's XML configuration file and trust KVM to work
> > properly. 
> > 
> > I wounldn't be happy with that test, but if you'd like I can set this test
> > in the Acceptance test plan for Ceph integration with Openstack and test it
> > every major version/release candidate.
> > 
> > Is this agreeable?
> 
> Yes, this seems appropriate. Responsibility for regression testing of KVM
> itself really falls to Virt QE.

Agreed.

Comment 10 Yogev Rabl 2015-12-20 12:21:47 UTC
(In reply to Stephen Gordon from comment #8)
> (In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Stephen Gordon from comment #6)
> > > (In reply to Yogev Rabl from comment #5)
> > > > Hi Steve,
> > > > 
> > > > This test is not a part of the automation suite yet. This test requires some
> > > > manual handling in order to monitor the I/O of the instances.
> > > 
> > > Is there anything we can do about this? A key metric for the OSP-8 release
> > > is that features be tested via automation, otherwise we can't call them out.
> > > This is to ensure that we also regression test this functionality in future
> > > releases.
> > 
> > We can set all the necessary requirements for this feature and check they
> > are configured in the VM's XML configuration file and trust KVM to work
> > properly. 
> > 
> > I wounldn't be happy with that test, but if you'd like I can set this test
> > in the Acceptance test plan for Ceph integration with Openstack and test it
> > every major version/release candidate.
> > 
> > Is this agreeable?
> 
> Yes, this seems appropriate. Responsibility for regression testing of KVM
> itself really falls to Virt QE.

Agreed.

Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2016-04-07 21:07:30 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2016-0603.html


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.