More comments: SmfAdminOperation should not abort if IMM error e.g. bad handle or timeout. - Retry if timeout when obtaining handles (a limited numbers of times) - If IMM fail in the constructor do not abort just log the problem. - If IMM problem in a method do not abort, log the problem and fail
/Lennart > -----Original Message----- > From: Lennart Lund > Sent: den 21 juni 2016 14:27 > To: reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com; Rafael Odzakow > <rafael.odza...@ericsson.com> > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Lennart Lund > <lennart.l...@ericsson.com> > Subject: RE: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: Lock nodes in > parallel [#1634] > > The cluster name is actually read. It was a default value that was hard coded. > No more patch will be added > > My comments to be fixed before push: > 1. > Remove hard coded default for cluster name. > Actually it is not the cluster name that is needed. What's needed is the > parent DN needed when creating a node group. This is read from IMM (is the > same as the cluster name) > 2. > Some renaming in order to make usage of variables and methods more clear > > /Lennart > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Lennart Lund > > Sent: den 17 juni 2016 17:15 > > To: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com>; > > reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com; Rafael Odzakow > > <rafael.odza...@ericsson.com> > > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > Subject: RE: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: Lock nodes in > > parallel [#1634] > > > > 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Attend Shape: An AT&T Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT&T Park in San Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries present their vision of the future. This family event has something for everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today. http://sdm.link/attshape _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
