)]}'
{"nova/scheduler/client/report.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"54c0cb4e171c3477ff4671b8574590250187023f","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":112,"context_line":"            try:"},{"line_number":113,"context_line":"                return f(self, *a, **k)"},{"line_number":114,"context_line":"            except Retry as e:"},{"line_number":115,"context_line":"                LOG.warning("},{"line_number":116,"context_line":"                    \u0027Unable to %(op)s because %(reason)s; retrying...\u0027,"},{"line_number":117,"context_line":"                    {\u0027op\u0027: e.operation, \u0027reason\u0027: e.reason})"},{"line_number":118,"context_line":"        LOG.error(\u0027Failed scheduler client operation %s: out of retries\u0027,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f4b6375_8461743c","line":115,"range":{"start_line":115,"start_character":20,"end_line":115,"end_character":27},"updated":"2017-10-31 17:43:23.000000000","message":"Maybe this should be a debug message since it\u0027s potentially an expected situation in a busy cloud with allocations packed to the same hosts. Just thinking about how this was debug in claim_resources and would now be logged as a warning during scheduling. I\u0027m not sure what an operator would do with the warnings besides change their scheduling pattern to spread over pack.","commit_id":"c318c69ca65e90d4a2f6a9695069c1b3d0014707"}],"nova/tests/unit/scheduler/client/test_report.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"54c0cb4e171c3477ff4671b8574590250187023f","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":296,"context_line":"    def test_put_allocations_retries_conflict(self, mock_put):"},{"line_number":297,"context_line":""},{"line_number":298,"context_line":"        failed \u003d mock.MagicMock()"},{"line_number":299,"context_line":"        failed.status_code \u003d 409"},{"line_number":300,"context_line":"        failed.text \u003d \"concurrently updated\""},{"line_number":301,"context_line":""},{"line_number":302,"context_line":"        succeeded \u003d mock.MagicMock()"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f4b6375_a44910b8","line":299,"updated":"2017-10-31 17:43:23.000000000","message":"I think you meant to do this in the other patch in the series.","commit_id":"c318c69ca65e90d4a2f6a9695069c1b3d0014707"}]}