Hi Nhat Pham,
I stared reviewing this patch , so can please provide README file with
scope and limitations ,
that will help to define testing/reviewing scope .
Following are minimum things we can keep in mind while
reviewing/accepting patch ,
- Not effecting existing functionality
- during headless state applications may behave like during CPND
restart case
- The minimum functionally of application works
- The behavior of application will be consistent with
other saf services like imm/amf behavior during headless state.
So please do provide any additional detailed in README if any of the
above is deviated ,
that allow users to know about the limitations/deviation.
-AVM
On 1/4/2016 3:15 PM, Nhat Pham wrote:
> Summary: cpsv: Support preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas during
> headless state [#1621]
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1621
> Peer Reviewer(s): [email protected]; [email protected]
> Pull request to: [email protected]
> Affected branch(es): default
> Development branch: default
>
> --------------------------------
> Impacted area Impact y/n
> --------------------------------
> Docs n
> Build system n
> RPM/packaging n
> Configuration files n
> Startup scripts n
> SAF services y
> OpenSAF services n
> Core libraries n
> Samples n
> Tests n
> Other n
>
>
> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> changeset faec4a4445a4c23e8f630857b19aabb43b5af18d
> Author: Nhat Pham <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:34:33 +0700
>
> cpsv: Support preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas during
> headless state [#1621]
>
> Background:
> ---------- This enhancement supports to preserve checkpoint replicas in
> case
> both SCs down (headless state) and recover replicas in case one of SCs
> up
> again. If both SCs goes down, checkpoint replicas on surviving nodes
> still
> remain. When a SC is available again, surviving replicas are
> automatically
> registered to the SC checkpoint database. Content in surviving replicas
> are
> intacted and synchronized to new replicas.
>
> When no SC is available, client API calls changing checkpoint
> configuration
> which requires SC communication, are rejected. Client API calls reading
> and
> writing existing checkpoint replicas still work.
>
> Limitation: The CKPT service does not support recovering checkpoints in
> following cases:
> - The checkpoint which is unlinked before headless.
> - The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating on SC.
> - The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating on a PL
> and this
> PL restarts during headless state. In this cases, the checkpoint
> replica is
> destroyed. The fault code SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE is returned when the
> client
> accesses the checkpoint in these cases. The client must re-open the
> checkpoint.
>
> While in headless state, accessing checkpoint replicas does not work if
> the
> node which hosts the active replica goes down. It will back working
> when a
> SC available again.
>
> Solution:
> --------- The solution for this enhancement includes 2 parts:
>
> 1. To destroy un-recoverable checkpoint described above when both SCs
> are
> down: When both SCs are down, the CPND deletes un-recoverable checkpoint
> nodes and replicas on PLs. Then it requests CPA to destroy corresponding
> checkpoint node by using new message CPA_EVT_ND2A_CKPT_DESTROY
>
> 2. To update CPD with checkpoint information When an active SC is up
> after
> headless, CPND will update CPD with checkpoint information by using new
> message CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_INFO_UPDATE instead of using
> CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE. This is because the CPND will create new
> ckpt_id
> for the checkpoint which might be different with the current ckpt id if
> the
> CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE is used. The CPD collects checkpoint
> information
> within 6s. During this updating time, following requests is rejected
> with
> fault code SA_AIS_ERR_TRY_AGAIN:
> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE
> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_UNLINK
> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_ACTIVE_SET
> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_RDSET
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
> osaf/libs/agents/saf/cpa/cpa_proc.c | 52
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/cpsv_edu.c | 43
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_cb.h | 3 ++
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_imm.h | 1 +
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_proc.h | 7 ++++
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_tmr.h | 3 +-
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_cb.h | 1 +
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_init.h | 2 +
> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpsv_evt.h | 20 +++++++++++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/Makefile.am | 3 +-
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_evt.c | 229
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_imm.c | 112
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_init.c | 20 ++++++++++++-
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_proc.c | 309
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_tmr.c | 7 ++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_db.c | 16 ++++++++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c | 22 +++++++++++++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_init.c | 23 ++++++++++++++-
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_mds.c | 13 ++++++++
> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_proc.c | 314
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 20 files changed, 1189 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
> -
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
> -
>
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
> <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>>
>
>
> Arch Built Started Linux distro
> -------------------------------------------
> mips n n
> mips64 n n
> x86 n n
> x86_64 n n
> powerpc n n
> powerpc64 n n
>
>
> Reviewer Checklist:
> -------------------
> [Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
>
>
> Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
>
> ___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
> that need proper data filled in.
>
> ___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
>
> ___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
>
> ___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
>
> ___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
>
> ___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
>
> ___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
> (i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
>
> ___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
> Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
>
> ___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
>
> ___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
> like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
>
> ___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
> cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
>
> ___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
> too much content into a single commit.
>
> ___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
>
> ___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
> Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
>
> ___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
> commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
>
> ___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
> of what has changed between each re-send.
>
> ___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
> comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
>
> ___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
>
> ___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
> the threaded patch review.
>
> ___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
> for in-service upgradability test.
>
> ___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
> do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
