No problem. So, I have some questions that I'm hoping someone can direct me as to the best place to post and how to proceed process wise on bug1059923. This is my first commit, so I'm still figuring out the process...
1) The commit that was done, was reverted. Do I continue to use the review (19649) for this issue, or do I open a new review? If the latter, is there some indication in the original review that this was reverted? 2) Regarding a proposed solution, where is the best place to discuss proposals? In the review? In openstack-dev? elsewhere? 3) Specifically on this bug… I'm unsure as to how we want to approach this (for quantum server)… whether to mark some plugin config options as 'required' so that existing logic will catch it if they are missing (I have numerous questions if that route is taken), or drive the validation logic down into the individual plugin, having them validate configuration settings (again a bunch of questions). Where can I discuss these ideas, rather than going back an forth a dozen times in the review? Thanks, PCM (Paul Michali) On Jan 31, 2013, at 10:23 PM, Dan Wendlandt wrote: > Apologies to Paul. quantum-core requires moderation of non-member posts > (can't seem to find a way to change this), and the launchpad email notifying > me of his posts were mixed in with a deluge of launchpad emails from mark's > hard work tagging each quantum bug :) > > sorry for the confusion. > > dan > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Paul Michali <[email protected]> wrote: > Any suggestions on how I tell if the sql_connection (or if there are other > settings) are valid though? Would there be one for the service itself, and > maybe we could check to see if the two are at least the same connection type? > > Regards, > > PCM (Paul Michali) > > On Jan 28, 2013, at 8:29 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: > >> On 01/28/2013 03:25 PM, Paul Michali wrote: >>> >>> OK, so where do we go from here? Do I continue to revise my change set to >>> A) show plugin agent configs loaded for debugging purposes (like the >>> service does), B) validate plugin agent config options (not specified in >>> the bug, but people were suggesting this be done), and/or C) validate >>> plugin config for the service? >> >> I am leaning towards C. Do the core_plugin validation on the service >>> >>> For B) I had raised the question in the review of how do we tell if the >>> plugin specific configurations are loaded? I see that many have >>> sql_connection under DATABASE, and there are OVS configurations for the >>> four agents, but all of these seem to provide a default value, if none >>> specified. How do I tell if the default value is "valid"? I guess in the >>> case of the bug they were using a MySQL database connection and without the >>> plugin agent .ini it was falling back to sqlite? >>> >>> For C) similar to B) how do I pick configuration values to test and how do >>> I make sure they are "valid"? >> >> I think that most or maybe all of the open source plugins make use of the >> DATABASE variables. A recent change was done to ensure that there are >> defined in 1 place instead of N (where N==number of plugins). >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> PCM (Paul Michali) >>> >>> On Jan 28, 2013, at 6:57 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: >>> >>>> On 01/28/2013 01:55 PM, Paul Michali wrote: >>>>> On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:20 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> It has come to my attention (and not sure how I missed it), that the >>>>>> aforementioned patch does not actually solve the issue. There are two >>>>>> problems here: >>>>>> 1. The validation should be done on the quantum service >>>>> >>>>>> 2. The agents do not require the quantum core plugin - this is only for >>>>>> the service. >>>>> PCM: It ended up being pretty convoluted, as we went round and round on >>>>> solutions… >>>>> >>>>> I thought that the agents did not operate correctly, if the core_plugin >>>>> config item was not specified? I'll try to double check. >>>> >>>> The agent does not require the plugin variable. The plugin is actually >>>> only loaded by the service. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> For the server, it already displays the config settings applied, and >>>>> checks that the core_plugin is specified. I could not identify an agent >>>>> plugin config to check, as there are default values applied (e.g. >>>>> sql_connection has SQL lite) and I couldn't tell if the default was valid >>>>> or not. >>>>> >>>>> In any case, let me know what I need to do on this bug and on the commit. >>>> >>>> Dan has done a rollback. >>>> Thanks >>>> Gary >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> PCM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Sorry for the mess. How can we revert the patch? >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> Gary >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > > > -- > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Dan Wendlandt > Nicira, Inc: www.nicira.com > twitter: danwendlandt > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
