----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yedidyah Bar David" <d...@redhat.com> > To: "Doron Fediuck" <dfedi...@redhat.com> > Cc: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbona...@redhat.com>, "Jiri Moskovcak" > <jmosk...@redhat.com> > Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2014 12:28:27 PM > Subject: Re: Bug 1076530 – engine shouldn't kill the vds running the VM with > the hosted engine > > Might be better to discuss this on bugzilla. > Bugzilla is not a mailing list. Moving to engine-devel.
> ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfedi...@redhat.com> > > To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbona...@redhat.com> > > Cc: "Yedidyah Bar David" <d...@redhat.com>, "Jiri Moskovcak" > > <jmosk...@redhat.com> > > Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2014 12:01:51 PM > > Subject: Bug 1076530 – engine shouldn't kill the vds running the VM with > > the hosted engine > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076530 > > > > Sandro, > > I think this would be solved by a better validation during setup / > > deployment. > > This can't be done during Validation in the otopi sense of the word. > At that point the engine does not exist yet and so we can't know what > versions it supports etc. > Why not? You have the vdsm supported versions in a file (dsaversion IIRC) and you should be able to get the relevant engine info before or after deploying the DB. > It might be possible (didn't check) to check the versions right before > trying to add the host to the cluster. This means we do not want to > abort (as we can do during Validation if something does not pass it). > What can we do? Perhaps offer a few options: > 1. Do abort (will do mostly what happens today) > 2. Let the user try to manually fix, probably by trying to change > the compatibility version of the cluster, and then try adding the > host again > 3. Try to fix ourselves (same) and try adding again > 4. Best would be to someone upgrade libvirt and reconfigure vdsm. > Not sure that's easy or even possible at this stage, where VM is > running and we do not want to loose it. > > Thinking about this again, I am not sure the current behavior is that > bad. "Fixing" by re-installing with the correct versions is probably > way simpler than fixing after installation is (mostly) complete. > > > > > I'm not keen on adding hosted-engine logic into the engine code. > > Not sure about that. Not that it would help much, because the root > problem will still have to be solved, but in principle it might be > a good thing if the engine knows that killing some host will kill itself, > and so try harder to not do that and just leave it in some zombie, > requires-manual-action state. This is obviously more important during > normal operation than during installation. > -- > Didi > _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
