I am not sure what is best solution here but same test passes in Boron, so this may be seen as a regression :(
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 2:17 AM, Jozef Bacigál <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Luis, > > I did some investigation to the bug 6459 [1]. First of all before it was > working in some strange way. From the description from you the test is > running like this: > - Connect switch to 1 node out of the 3 that conforms the cluster. > - Kill the karaf process of that node. > - Check switch operational info (inv & topo) is still available where there > is no switch connected to cluster anymore. > - Disconnect switch from killed node. > - Start killed node. > - Check switch operational info (inv & topo) is still available where there > is no switch connected to cluster anymore. > > It means we are running cluster with several controllers but connect one > switch to one controller. This controller will create a record in DS inv for > this device. Then you kill controller, thats mean plugin maybe get or maybe > not get the event of switch disconnection but anyway we cant delete it from > DS because the controller is already down. Other instances of plugin in > cluster do not know about this switch, it was not connected to them. > Afterward you disconnect the switch, plugin, controller already down. Then > you start the controller again. Plugin could search the DS for any device > which is in DS inv but not connected, but plugin doesn't know if that switch > is not created by another cluster node or even if plugin is in cluster at > all. So plugin can't delete it anyway. > > Before is was correct because we deleted all nodes from DS inv when > disconnected, this leaded plugin in unstable state in case we deleted the > switch from DS after another cluster node was created/updated it in DS and > started working. > > So there is two possibilities in my mind. > - Plugin clear all nodes immediately (which may or may not solve this > problem, if cluster went down quicker the we get the info about disconnecting > and may lead to the bug when plugin deleted working node for another cluster > node). > - We accept that there is not possibility to clear inv if switch was > connected only to one node and cluster went down unexpected. > > Guys if you got any other idea let my know, need to fresh thoughts > <OutlookEmoji-😊.png> > > Jozef > > > > [1] https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6459 > <https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6459>
_______________________________________________ openflowplugin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
