Hi

In this patch cluster name is hard coded to "safAmfCluster=myAmfCluster". I 
will add a patch that read the name instead

Thanks
Lennart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lennart Lund [mailto:lennart.l...@ericsson.com]
> Sent: den 17 juni 2016 17:08
> To: reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com; Rafael Odzakow
> <rafael.odza...@ericsson.com>
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: Lock nodes in
> parallel [#1634]
> 
> Summary: smf: Lock nodes in parallel
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1634
> Peer Reviewer(s): reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com,
> rafael.odza...@ericsson.com
> Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
> Affected branch(es): devel
> Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>
> 
> --------------------------------
> 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 155aaab4571280481cb1333d3e63cc8175a5f735
> Author:       Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com>
> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:18:51 +0200
> 
>       smf: Lock nodes in parallel [#1634]
> 
>       A new SetAdminState class for handling admin operation on nodes,
> SUs and
>       components is created This class replaces the callAdminOperation()
> method in
>       the SmfUpgradeStep class It operates on the list of units created for
> the
>       step. Admin of SUs and components is handled serial as before but
> nodes are
>       handled in parallel via node groups
> 
> 
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
>  osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.cc   |  991
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> +++++++++++----------
>  osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.hh   |   96 +++++++-
>  osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUtils.cc         |    2 +
>  osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/smfd_campaign_oi.cc |    2 +-
>  osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/smfd_evt.c          |    2 +-
>  5 files changed, 949 insertions(+), 144 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
> For testing parallel lock, lock-in, unlock-in and unlock (nodes):
> Run a single step campaign with nodes as activation/deactivation units
> 
> For testing above sequence with SUs (will be handled in series as before):
> Run a single step campaign with SUs as activation/deactivation units
> 
> Suggest test of a mix of nodes and SUs. Nodes will be handled in parallel and
> SUs in series:
> Run a single step campaign with nodes and SUs as activation/deactivation
> units
> 
> For testing restart of components:
> Run a single steprolling campaign with components as activation/deactivation
> units
> 
> Steps:
> Build an UML cluster and install the demo app
> > build_uml
> > env APPCONFIG=AppConfig-nwayactive.xml ./build_uml install_testprog
> 
> On node
> Unlock demo app for all SUs
> # amf-adm unlock-in safSu=SU1,safSg=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo2
> # amf-adm unlock safSu=SU1,safSg=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo2
> .
> .
> .
> 
> Install and execute campaign
> Suggest testing with smfKeepDuState on/off
> 
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
> Same as if testing without patch
> Lock sequence test for nodes should be faster with patch
> 
> 
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
> Ack by reviewers
> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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. http://sdm.link/zohomanageengine
> _______________________________________________
> Opensaf-devel mailing list
> Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. http://sdm.link/zohomanageengine
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to