)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"ca38063eccd4cbe1f91d1d0e91c59f3a89474631","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":12,"context_line":"times out on a slow node. Before the bugfix the short timeout was needed"},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"to speed up the test but after the fix it is not needed any more so it"},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"is removed to stabilize the test."},{"line_number":15,"context_line":""},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"Change-Id: I12990eaca3820e56047e4d0e526c436fd2cfcf31"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"Related-Bug: #1909120"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"8d770616_eaa60605","line":15,"updated":"2021-02-24 18:55:25.000000000","message":"yep this explains why its valid to remove the reduced timeout.\n\ntechinically before the fix the 1 second time out could have cause the\nserver create to fail too but 1 its exceedingly unlikely and 2 that \nwont be an issue in the ci once this is merged so this looks good to me.","commit_id":"c8478e40bdb996d5e0a1f01ae0ae55e6926f318d"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"ca38063eccd4cbe1f91d1d0e91c59f3a89474631","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":14,"context_line":"is removed to stabilize the test."},{"line_number":15,"context_line":""},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"Change-Id: I12990eaca3820e56047e4d0e526c436fd2cfcf31"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"Related-Bug: #1909120"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"5d0be77a_9542b809","line":17,"range":{"start_line":17,"start_character":14,"end_line":17,"end_character":21},"updated":"2021-02-24 18:55:25.000000000","message":"just looking at the bug report that is still in confrimed.\n\nshould it be in fix released since I759aa36dc00a6c0612b9755dacd9aa414c408498 is merged","commit_id":"c8478e40bdb996d5e0a1f01ae0ae55e6926f318d"}],"nova/tests/functional/regressions/test_bug_1909120.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":4690,"name":"melanie witt","display_name":"melwitt","email":"melwittt@gmail.com","username":"melwitt"},"change_message_id":"497ca97f000693d852bddc6351ee14ae711552c8","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":29,"context_line":""},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"        # _IntegratedTestBase uses CastAsCall so set the response timeout to 1"},{"line_number":31,"context_line":"        self.flags(rpc_response_timeout\u003d1)"},{"line_number":32,"context_line":""},{"line_number":33,"context_line":"        # Launch a test instance"},{"line_number":34,"context_line":"        server \u003d self._create_server(networks\u003d\u0027none\u0027)"},{"line_number":35,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"48cb283b_cf4b93dd","side":"PARENT","line":32,"updated":"2021-02-24 19:00:53.000000000","message":"Just a note that I think this was not necessary/correct, that is, I think the test should not have used _IntegratedTestBase if CastAsCall isn\u0027t appropriate. Or am I missing something?","commit_id":"fe6fb9ecc764135db6ce04bc84dfa47ab2cb4702"},{"author":{"_account_id":10135,"name":"Lee Yarwood","display_name":"Lee Yarwood","email":"lyarwood@redhat.com","username":"lyarwood"},"change_message_id":"bdbf2e52b0fe6830b5330ff4bc99c143f997a819","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":29,"context_line":""},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"        # _IntegratedTestBase uses CastAsCall so set the response timeout to 1"},{"line_number":31,"context_line":"        self.flags(rpc_response_timeout\u003d1)"},{"line_number":32,"context_line":""},{"line_number":33,"context_line":"        # Launch a test instance"},{"line_number":34,"context_line":"        server \u003d self._create_server(networks\u003d\u0027none\u0027)"},{"line_number":35,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"6882b3f9_7f0be717","side":"PARENT","line":32,"in_reply_to":"1bacf82d_5c0010c2","updated":"2021-03-01 09:14:17.000000000","message":"Thanks Mel, I believe I wrote it like this to avoid any weird behaviour when casting within the func tests but given what I was trying to test here it shouldn\u0027t matter. I\u0027ll keep it in mind next time and avoid using _IntegratedTestBase.","commit_id":"fe6fb9ecc764135db6ce04bc84dfa47ab2cb4702"},{"author":{"_account_id":4690,"name":"melanie witt","display_name":"melwitt","email":"melwittt@gmail.com","username":"melwitt"},"change_message_id":"ec069f2aa11ae0399f7ea10dc2fa47decbd8b61b","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":29,"context_line":""},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"        # _IntegratedTestBase uses CastAsCall so set the response timeout to 1"},{"line_number":31,"context_line":"        self.flags(rpc_response_timeout\u003d1)"},{"line_number":32,"context_line":""},{"line_number":33,"context_line":"        # Launch a test instance"},{"line_number":34,"context_line":"        server \u003d self._create_server(networks\u003d\u0027none\u0027)"},{"line_number":35,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"be57e855_51563fc1","side":"PARENT","line":32,"in_reply_to":"2862f0aa_d841c4bb","updated":"2021-02-24 21:07:05.000000000","message":"I’m aware of that. What I’m saying is that I don’t think the original test should have been using the timeout to get to an api error faster, when in reality there wouldn’t be an api error as it’s a cast. It should have let casts be casts and reflect reality and the bug behavior would have been that the detach api didn’t raise an error, instead of falsely expecting a 500. Just MHO.","commit_id":"fe6fb9ecc764135db6ce04bc84dfa47ab2cb4702"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"204d047a6ff4e0d140f97c5c91ab723b1cca5649","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":29,"context_line":""},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"        # _IntegratedTestBase uses CastAsCall so set the response timeout to 1"},{"line_number":31,"context_line":"        self.flags(rpc_response_timeout\u003d1)"},{"line_number":32,"context_line":""},{"line_number":33,"context_line":"        # Launch a test instance"},{"line_number":34,"context_line":"        server \u003d self._create_server(networks\u003d\u0027none\u0027)"},{"line_number":35,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"1bacf82d_5c0010c2","side":"PARENT","line":32,"in_reply_to":"390b1ed5_285831aa","updated":"2021-02-25 21:22:15.000000000","message":"oh ya thats a lot simpler yes proably # FIXME instead of BUG but ya both work i guess.","commit_id":"fe6fb9ecc764135db6ce04bc84dfa47ab2cb4702"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"375bcd3c02d5389293f046803b765429cb00ae2e","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":29,"context_line":""},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"        # _IntegratedTestBase uses CastAsCall so set the response timeout to 1"},{"line_number":31,"context_line":"        self.flags(rpc_response_timeout\u003d1)"},{"line_number":32,"context_line":""},{"line_number":33,"context_line":"        # Launch a test instance"},{"line_number":34,"context_line":"        server \u003d self._create_server(networks\u003d\u0027none\u0027)"},{"line_number":35,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"2862f0aa_d841c4bb","side":"PARENT","line":32,"in_reply_to":"48cb283b_cf4b93dd","updated":"2021-02-24 19:31:38.000000000","message":"cast as call is fine in this case.\nthe issue is that if the node is slow the server create can take more then 1 second.\n\nlee really only wanted to limit the time out for the detach on line 57\n\nwith the api fix however we wont wait for the rpc timeout to get an error it will not get rejected in the\napi before hitting the rpc layer.\n\nso i think removing this so that we dont affect other rpcs in teh backround makes sense.","commit_id":"fe6fb9ecc764135db6ce04bc84dfa47ab2cb4702"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"1999d1db793759f33f9706dc71ca858c250d6016","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":29,"context_line":""},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"        # _IntegratedTestBase uses CastAsCall so set the response timeout to 1"},{"line_number":31,"context_line":"        self.flags(rpc_response_timeout\u003d1)"},{"line_number":32,"context_line":""},{"line_number":33,"context_line":"        # Launch a test instance"},{"line_number":34,"context_line":"        server \u003d self._create_server(networks\u003d\u0027none\u0027)"},{"line_number":35,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"ca7db21d_6b3057b4","side":"PARENT","line":32,"in_reply_to":"be57e855_51563fc1","updated":"2021-02-24 21:24:08.000000000","message":"oh ok sorry yes you are right.\n\nthis is a cast normally so it would have be an async request\nhttps://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/9fdbda608834d6b777fc468ca465637e20315984/nova/compute/rpcapi.py#L650-L657\n\nso ya the api would not have returned 500 it would have returned 204 proably and then if you checkted the server event list it likely would have failed? or it would have otherwise been lost with an rpc time out error in the logs.\n\ni guess a better repoduceer would have been to mock that cast and assert it was made then assert its not called with the fix or checked for the rpc timeout log or something like that instead of forcing the api to return 500 due to an rpc timeout.","commit_id":"fe6fb9ecc764135db6ce04bc84dfa47ab2cb4702"},{"author":{"_account_id":4690,"name":"melanie witt","display_name":"melwitt","email":"melwittt@gmail.com","username":"melwitt"},"change_message_id":"80620cb74747e02736efcba06dfb7d349038c5eb","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":29,"context_line":""},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"        # _IntegratedTestBase uses CastAsCall so set the response timeout to 1"},{"line_number":31,"context_line":"        self.flags(rpc_response_timeout\u003d1)"},{"line_number":32,"context_line":""},{"line_number":33,"context_line":"        # Launch a test instance"},{"line_number":34,"context_line":"        server \u003d self._create_server(networks\u003d\u0027none\u0027)"},{"line_number":35,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"390b1ed5_285831aa","side":"PARENT","line":32,"in_reply_to":"ca7db21d_6b3057b4","updated":"2021-02-25 20:54:42.000000000","message":"I think it just would have been like this:\n\n # BUG: detach returns success when it will not succeed\n resp \u003d self.api.delete_server_volume(server[\u0027id\u0027], volume_id)\n self.assertEqual(200, resp.status)\n\n # Uncomment when the bug is fixed: should fail if compute is down\n # ex \u003d self.assertRaises(\n #    client.OpenStackApiException,\n #    self.api.delete_server_volume, server[\u0027id\u0027], volume_id)\n # self.assertEqual(409, ex.response.status_code)","commit_id":"fe6fb9ecc764135db6ce04bc84dfa47ab2cb4702"}]}