)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":20190,"name":"zhufl","email":"zhu.fanglei@zte.com.cn","username":"zhufl"},"change_message_id":"b9a2ce147da946493b888ae11bfc7f3352103ec7","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"This scenario came up during the volume multi-attach spec review in"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"Nova and is something we should be sure is not allowed with a"},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"volume that is not marked as multiattach\u003dTrue."},{"line_number":12,"context_line":""},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"Change-Id: I98e25554d39449178df696a0d90cc62b662eda24"},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"Depends-On: Ifc01dbf98545104c998ab96f65ff8623a6db0f28"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"3f4b6375_0c9190f1","line":11,"range":{"start_line":11,"start_character":7,"end_line":11,"end_character":46},"updated":"2017-10-27 02:50:54.000000000","message":"If the volume is marked as multiattach\u003dTrue, will it be able to attach to the same server once again?","commit_id":"1bbeb97e4bd1992693311bd1be53a5a7b7a59c3b"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"456a08edc61b0fb195e8db893150d74d105c2c4a","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"This scenario came up during the volume multi-attach spec review in"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"Nova and is something we should be sure is not allowed with a"},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"volume that is not marked as multiattach\u003dTrue."},{"line_number":12,"context_line":""},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"Change-Id: I98e25554d39449178df696a0d90cc62b662eda24"},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"Depends-On: Ifc01dbf98545104c998ab96f65ff8623a6db0f28"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"df87a7cf_8451a811","line":11,"range":{"start_line":11,"start_character":7,"end_line":11,"end_character":46},"in_reply_to":"3f4b6375_0c9190f1","updated":"2017-12-01 14:30:52.000000000","message":"Not to the same instance. multiattach means you can attach the same volume to multiple different instances. Maybe there is a case for attaching the same volume to the same instance multiple times, but that doesn\u0027t make sense to me so I\u0027m not sure why we should allow it. We don\u0027t support multiattach volumes in nova yet anyway, so we can deal with that when we get there.","commit_id":"1bbeb97e4bd1992693311bd1be53a5a7b7a59c3b"},{"author":{"_account_id":8556,"name":"Ghanshyam Maan","display_name":"Ghanshyam Maan","email":"gmaan.os14@gmail.com","username":"ghanshyam"},"change_message_id":"6a5cd9dccc383e811300dbb87af096faf45c2404","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"This scenario came up during the volume multi-attach spec review in"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"Nova and is something we should be sure is not allowed with a"},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"volume that is not marked as multiattach\u003dTrue."},{"line_number":12,"context_line":""},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"Change-Id: I98e25554d39449178df696a0d90cc62b662eda24"},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"Depends-On: Ifc01dbf98545104c998ab96f65ff8623a6db0f28"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":2,"id":"df87a7cf_56adf698","line":11,"range":{"start_line":11,"start_character":7,"end_line":11,"end_character":46},"updated":"2017-12-08 04:12:29.000000000","message":"this is not valid now right? Even vol is marked as multiattach, we do not want to reattach that to same server.","commit_id":"5cb6f0a81f5f4cac01d09778cb610d6aeb0edcb4"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"5db9a9d49fa86b32c57bd181891f3631bf2b442b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"This scenario came up during the volume multi-attach spec review in"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"Nova and is something we should be sure is not allowed with a"},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"volume that is not marked as multiattach\u003dTrue."},{"line_number":12,"context_line":""},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"Change-Id: I98e25554d39449178df696a0d90cc62b662eda24"},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"Depends-On: Ifc01dbf98545104c998ab96f65ff8623a6db0f28"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":2,"id":"df87a7cf_44f640fc","line":11,"range":{"start_line":11,"start_character":7,"end_line":11,"end_character":46},"in_reply_to":"df87a7cf_56adf698","updated":"2017-12-12 21:09:20.000000000","message":"That\u0027s the point of the test. With the new Cinder attach flow in the dependent patch, you can attach the same volume to the same instance even if it\u0027s not a multiattach volume, which is something noticed during review and is why I wrote this test to make sure we honor this from the API.","commit_id":"5cb6f0a81f5f4cac01d09778cb610d6aeb0edcb4"}],"tempest/api/compute/volumes/test_attach_volume_negative.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":20190,"name":"zhufl","email":"zhu.fanglei@zte.com.cn","username":"zhufl"},"change_message_id":"b9a2ce147da946493b888ae11bfc7f3352103ec7","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":44,"context_line":""},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"    @decorators.attr(type\u003d[\u0027negative\u0027])"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"    @decorators.idempotent_id(\u0027aab919e2-d992-4cbb-a4ed-745c2475398c\u0027)"},{"line_number":47,"context_line":"    def test_attach_attached_volume(self):"},{"line_number":48,"context_line":"        # Test attaching the same volume to the same instance once"},{"line_number":49,"context_line":"        # it\u0027s already attached."},{"line_number":50,"context_line":"        server \u003d self.create_test_server(wait_until\u003d\u0027ACTIVE\u0027)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f4b6375_8c3900f3","line":47,"range":{"start_line":47,"start_character":8,"end_line":47,"end_character":35},"updated":"2017-10-27 02:50:54.000000000","message":"The testcase name would be better to indicate \"the same server\", e.g., \u0027test_attach_volume_to_same_server_again\u0027, or something like this.","commit_id":"1bbeb97e4bd1992693311bd1be53a5a7b7a59c3b"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"456a08edc61b0fb195e8db893150d74d105c2c4a","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":44,"context_line":""},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"    @decorators.attr(type\u003d[\u0027negative\u0027])"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"    @decorators.idempotent_id(\u0027aab919e2-d992-4cbb-a4ed-745c2475398c\u0027)"},{"line_number":47,"context_line":"    def test_attach_attached_volume(self):"},{"line_number":48,"context_line":"        # Test attaching the same volume to the same instance once"},{"line_number":49,"context_line":"        # it\u0027s already attached."},{"line_number":50,"context_line":"        server \u003d self.create_test_server(wait_until\u003d\u0027ACTIVE\u0027)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"df87a7cf_c103220f","line":47,"range":{"start_line":47,"start_character":8,"end_line":47,"end_character":35},"in_reply_to":"3f4b6375_8c3900f3","updated":"2017-12-01 14:30:52.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"1bbeb97e4bd1992693311bd1be53a5a7b7a59c3b"},{"author":{"_account_id":9562,"name":"Ildiko Vancsa","email":"ildiko.vancsa@gmail.com","username":"ildikov"},"change_message_id":"f8f47191f46154a863c1ddf47edfdf819c77fcc2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":45,"context_line":"    @decorators.attr(type\u003d[\u0027negative\u0027])"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"    @decorators.idempotent_id(\u0027aab919e2-d992-4cbb-a4ed-745c2475398c\u0027)"},{"line_number":47,"context_line":"    def test_attach_attached_volume(self):"},{"line_number":48,"context_line":"        # Test attaching the same volume to the same instance once"},{"line_number":49,"context_line":"        # it\u0027s already attached."},{"line_number":50,"context_line":"        server \u003d self.create_test_server(wait_until\u003d\u0027ACTIVE\u0027)"},{"line_number":51,"context_line":"        volume \u003d self.create_volume()"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f4b6375_0174b2cd","line":48,"range":{"start_line":48,"start_character":29,"end_line":48,"end_character":61},"updated":"2017-10-27 08:05:56.000000000","message":"For some reason I missed the same instance aspect, which we allow today to be able to do live migrate.","commit_id":"1bbeb97e4bd1992693311bd1be53a5a7b7a59c3b"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"a5a488bc1cc23c4f95158a64525145ef5ac9feeb","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":45,"context_line":"    @decorators.attr(type\u003d[\u0027negative\u0027])"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"    @decorators.idempotent_id(\u0027aab919e2-d992-4cbb-a4ed-745c2475398c\u0027)"},{"line_number":47,"context_line":"    def test_attach_attached_volume(self):"},{"line_number":48,"context_line":"        # Test attaching the same volume to the same instance once"},{"line_number":49,"context_line":"        # it\u0027s already attached."},{"line_number":50,"context_line":"        server \u003d self.create_test_server(wait_until\u003d\u0027ACTIVE\u0027)"},{"line_number":51,"context_line":"        volume \u003d self.create_volume()"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f4b6375_4326276a","line":48,"range":{"start_line":48,"start_character":29,"end_line":48,"end_character":61},"in_reply_to":"3f4b6375_0174b2cd","updated":"2017-10-27 14:02:43.000000000","message":"True, but with different host connectors. I thought there was some sort of unique constraint on instance id + volume id + host so that I can\u0027t have multiple volume attachments to the same instance on the same host?","commit_id":"1bbeb97e4bd1992693311bd1be53a5a7b7a59c3b"},{"author":{"_account_id":17386,"name":"Steve Noyes","email":"steve.noyes@oracle.com","username":"ssn1ssn"},"change_message_id":"9664a6510dc077c60a9432e35fc9315154a7faf5","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":45,"context_line":"    @decorators.attr(type\u003d[\u0027negative\u0027])"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"    @decorators.idempotent_id(\u0027aab919e2-d992-4cbb-a4ed-745c2475398c\u0027)"},{"line_number":47,"context_line":"    def test_attach_attached_volume(self):"},{"line_number":48,"context_line":"        # Test attaching the same volume to the same instance once"},{"line_number":49,"context_line":"        # it\u0027s already attached."},{"line_number":50,"context_line":"        server \u003d self.create_test_server(wait_until\u003d\u0027ACTIVE\u0027)"},{"line_number":51,"context_line":"        volume \u003d self.create_volume()"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f4b6375_934a26aa","line":48,"range":{"start_line":48,"start_character":29,"end_line":48,"end_character":61},"in_reply_to":"3f4b6375_4326276a","updated":"2017-10-27 19:03:15.000000000","message":"Attach today (prior to multiattach) relies on cinder rejecting an attach of an in-use volume. Once we have multi-attach, we need to relax that constraint, but a also add a new constraint to prevent attachment of a volume twice to the same server.\n\nPrior to multi-attach, live migrate didn\u0027t call attach/detach so it avoided that exception. Likewise in the new multiattach code, this exception is not thrown. And this new check will have to be done in a way to avoid causing live migrates to fail (as Matt mentions migrate has different hosts, so that would be a good way to tell them apart.)","commit_id":"1bbeb97e4bd1992693311bd1be53a5a7b7a59c3b"},{"author":{"_account_id":8556,"name":"Ghanshyam Maan","display_name":"Ghanshyam Maan","email":"gmaan.os14@gmail.com","username":"ghanshyam"},"change_message_id":"6a5cd9dccc383e811300dbb87af096faf45c2404","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":54,"context_line":""},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"        self.attach_volume(server, volume)"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":""},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"        self.assertRaises(lib_exc.BadRequest,"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"                          self.attach_volume, server, volume)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"df87a7cf_56865615","line":57,"range":{"start_line":57,"start_character":26,"end_line":57,"end_character":44},"updated":"2017-12-08 04:12:29.000000000","message":"+1, waiting for api-ref or some doc on nova side to mention  about 400 in this case.","commit_id":"5cb6f0a81f5f4cac01d09778cb610d6aeb0edcb4"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"5db9a9d49fa86b32c57bd181891f3631bf2b442b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":54,"context_line":""},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"        self.attach_volume(server, volume)"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":""},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"        self.assertRaises(lib_exc.BadRequest,"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"                          self.attach_volume, server, volume)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"df87a7cf_44cf20b0","line":57,"range":{"start_line":57,"start_character":26,"end_line":57,"end_character":44},"in_reply_to":"df87a7cf_56865615","updated":"2017-12-12 21:09:20.000000000","message":"There are all sorts of reasons you could get a 400 when attaching a volume to an instance, like the requested volume isn\u0027t found, or doesn\u0027t match the AZ that the instance is in depending on how nova is configured.\n\nThe compute API reference doesn\u0027t go into every detail about which ways things could fail:\n\nhttps://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/#attach-a-volume-to-an-instance","commit_id":"5cb6f0a81f5f4cac01d09778cb610d6aeb0edcb4"}]}