Hi Alex/Praveen,

I don't remember being part of a discussion where the STANDBY assignments 
should be
given the same treatment as 'QUIESCED/QUIESCING' in this scenario. 
I guess the implementation just took that route based on the words "or another 
HA state" as-in
P 186, section 3.8.1.3, lines29- 30 - "the active HA state is removed from 
components or
another HA state is assigned to components"

In my opinion, I think both ACTIVE and STANDBY assignments should follow the 
same ordering of dependencies .
I also think this brings no additional considerations whether it is PI or NPI.

Cheers,
Mathi.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Alex Jones [mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 7:24 PM
>To: praveen malviya; [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [users] AMF question on CSI ordering
>
>Thanks Praveen.
>
>Maybe I need to be a little clearer here.
>
>We have two SA-aware components in the same SI. We use
>saAmfCSIDependencies to make sure that the ACTIVE assignment for one CSI
>always precedes the other. This works as we expect. But, we notice that it is
>not the case when the STANDBY assignment is done. And I don't understand
>why. I understand for QUIESCED/QUIESCING that the order should be
>reversed, but why not have the same order for STANDBY as ACTIVE for SA-
>aware components?
>
>I don't see a mention of NPI anywhere in 3.8.1.3, so I'm not sure what you
>mean here.
>
>Alex
>
>
>On 03/30/2016 09:18 AM, praveen malviya wrote:
>> Please see inline.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Praveen
>>
>> On 30-Mar-16 6:18 PM, Alex Jones wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>       Does anyone know what is the reasoning behind "*/reverse order
>>> is applied when /**/... another HA state is assigned to components/*"
>>> in the AMF spec in 3.8.1.3. Apparently OpenSAF interprets this for
>>> STANDBY assignment. In other words, if I use CSIDependencies I can
>>> order the ACTIVE assignment for each CSI, but the STANDBY CSI
>>> assignments are done in reverse. I understand why QUIESCING or
>>> QUIESCED should be done in reverse order, but why STANDBY? I would
>>> think you would want the ordering the same as for ACTIVE.
>>>
>>>       Can someone explain this?
>>
>> In the section 3.8.1.3, the example used for explanation of CSI deps
>> models NPI components. In the next section (3.8.2 page 188), spec
>> clearly differentiate between the use of saAmfCompinstantiationlevel
>> and CSI deps for resolving dependencies among components.
>> So in case of NPI components, there will be no assignments for
>> standby. So the question of order becomes invalid. For
>> quiesced/quiescing state termination will be done in reverse order and
>> it goes with spec.
>>
>> At the same time for sa-aware compnents, SI deps is the way that spec
>> proposes for any assignment related dependencies and
>> saAmfCompinstantiationlevel for any execution environment related deps.
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ---------
>>>
>>> Transform Data into Opportunity.
>>> Accelerate data analysis in your applications with Intel Data
>>> Analytics Acceleration Library.
>>> Click to learn more.
>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785471&iu=/4140
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensaf-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-users
>>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Transform Data into Opportunity.
>Accelerate data analysis in your applications with Intel Data Analytics
>Acceleration Library.
>Click to learn more.
>http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785471&iu=/4140
>_______________________________________________
>Opensaf-users mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785471&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-users

Reply via email to