On 19.4.2016 12:42, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 04/14/2016 11:46 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:

On 04/14/2016 10:59 AM, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 04/14/2016 08:24 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 13.4.2016 17:10, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Martin Babinsky wrote:
This is a WIP patch which moves the `ipa-replica-manage del`
subcommand
to the 'server-del' API method and exposes it as CLI command[1]. A CI
test suite is also included.

There are some issues with the patch I would like to discuss in more
detail on the list:

1.) In the original subcommand there was a lot of output (mostly
print
statements) during all stages of master removal. I have tried to port
these as messages to the command which results in quite voluminous
response sent back to the frontend. Should we try to reduce the
output?

I don't think it applies anymore. These messages were there so the
user
would know something was happening. If it is an API command there
isn't
much we can do other than add something to the cli to print "This
could
take a bit" before making the call.

+1

This is already implemented in PoC. So I guess we may reduce the
output only to the following:


In CLI print:
"Removing {server} from replication topology, "
"please wait...

The adding info messages:

"checking topology connectivity" | "skipping topology connectivity
check"
"checking remaining services" | "skipping check for remaining services"
"performing cleanup"
"Deleted server {server}"



2.) In the original discussion[2] we assumed that the cleanup part
would
me a separate API method called during server_del postcallback.
However
since the two objects ended up sharing a lot of state (e.g. topology
state from pre-callback, messages) i have merged it to server-del.
That
makes the code rather unwieldy but I found it difficult to keep the
two
entities separate without some hacking around framework capabilities

I haven't looked at the code but as a general principal having
separate
operations has saved our bacon on more than one occasion.

The patch adds a force option, which allows you to re-run server-del
even if the master entry does not exist anymore, so I think we are
safe.


3.) since actions in post-callback require a knowledge about topology
state gathered in pre-callback, I had to store some information in
the
command's context. Sorry about that, if you know about some way to
circumvent me, let me know.

Looks like it is the only way since you are extending server_del.
Another option would be to drop pre/post and add all this topology
stuff
directly to server_del execute.

4.) The master can not remove itself. I have implemented an ad-hoc
forwarding of the request to other master that can do the job. Is
this
okay?

Why can't the master remove itself?

Because it removes its own replication agreements hence any changes in
DIT (like removed principals, s4u2 proxy targets etc.) won't replicate
to other masters.
It shouldn't remove replication agreements, in fact this should be
prevented by the topology plugin.
The removal of the agreements will be triggered by removing the master
entry

That is true, but there is a plenty of cleanup code that is executed
*after* the master entry is removed and these changes would not
replicate if the agreements were removed by topology plugin in the
meanwhile.

What kind of cleanup is it? Can it be done before instead?

--
Jan Cholasta

--
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code

Reply via email to