Summary: clm: Fix performance regression for standby SC startup time [#1845]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1845
Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi
Pull request to:
Affected branch(es): opensaf-5.0.x, default(5.1)
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 7f4baa44223cf21d52833caf28e6f80dd8be50c6
Author: Anders Widell <anders.wid...@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 12:36:14 +0200
clm: Fix performance regression for standby SC startup time [#1845]
The OpenSAF start time for standby system controllers had degraded
between
OpenSAF 4.7 and OpenSAF 5.0. The reason was that the CLM node director
did
not reply to NID until the standby node had joined the cluster, and
therefore the whole startup of the standby controller was delayed. This
was
not a problem in OpenSAF 4.7 because the CLM node agent was started much
later in the NID sequence. The CLM node agent has now been changed so
that
it replies to NID properly during startup, which solves this regression.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/clmsv/nodeagent/main.c | 5 +++++
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Start the OpenSAF cluster with a large number (at least 100000) IMM objects
in the PBE.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Compare the start time for the standby controller before and after applying
this patch. The start time should be significantly shorter with the patch
applied.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from revier(s)
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 y y
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
planning reports. https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/305295220;132659582;e
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
