Hi Alex,

It needs a fix, standby should follow the same order as active.
But in case of removal of standby assignments, it must be in reversed 
order as indicated in spec.

Thanks,
Praveen

On 01-Apr-16 5:52 PM, Alex Jones wrote:
> Praveen/Mathi,
>
>      I am happy to write a ticket and fix it, if we agree that STANDBY
> should follow the same ordering as ACTIVE.
>
> Alex
>
>
> On 04/01/2016 08:05 AM, Mathivanan Naickan Palanivelu wrote:
>> 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
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-users

Reply via email to