[Resending under a new subject line]
>>> On 9/9/2008 at 5:32 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Brad
Nicholes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> On 9/9/2008 at 3:24 PM, in message
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> - * gmond/gmetad: The gmetad code can not handle a host with no associated
>> + * libganglia: The gmetad code can not handle a host with no associated
>> cluster, therefore the gmond code must always include a cluster XML
>> tag.
>> This patch matches up the default values for the cluster section of
>> gmond with the default gmond.conf so that a cluster name will always
>> @@ -182,6 +175,10 @@
>>
>> http://ganglia.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ganglia?view=rev&revision=1712
>
>> +1: bnicholes
>> +1: hawson
>> + -1: carenas
>> + carenas: not having a cluster section is documented as valid and might
>> + be a common setup with 2.5.x (still the official ganglia in
>> + Debian and [Open]SuSE)
>>
Carlo,
I don't understand the -1 vote on this. This fixes an issue that currently
exists in all previous releases by simply making sure that a cluster name value
exists rather than a NULL value. A NULL value for a cluster name is invalid as
shown by the code itself so the configuration should have never allowed the
cluster name to be NULL. This is the bug that the patch is fixing. It also
syncs up the internal default cluster values with the values that are shown in
the default configuration file. This has nothing to do with whether or not
version 2.5.x actually produces or doesn't produce a cluster tag. As a side
note, if the documentation or the DTD states that a missing cluster section is
valid, it is the documentation that has a bug. The code does not handle a
missing cluster section and never has even though a mis-configuration of the
cluster section allowed it. It is certainly not worth the effort to implement
functionality that is only produced by a mis-configura
tion of gmond. It is better to prevent the mis-configuration in the first
place.
Also, please don't change the text of a proposal unless you own it. The text
"Gmond/Gmetad" in this proposal is referring to a problem with the interaction
between the gmond and gmetad. It was not referring to where the actual patch
is applied. If you have a question about how a backport is proposed, please
ask.
Brad
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Ganglia-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers
