2009/9/7 Miroslav Suchý <[email protected]>: > I'm working on: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476851 > Bug 226915 - [ 976930 ] Monitoring failure on Satellite with external db > (where db name != db instance name) > > Which start to be PITA and one solution which comes to my mind is to remove > tables: rhn_db_environment and rhn_enviroment. It has been used in past [1]. > It relate database name to enviroment. E.g. > 'dev01a' => 'dev' environment; > But today it contain only one record: > insert into rhn_db_environment(db_name,environment) values > ('WEBDEV','LICENSE'); > where webdev is replaced during installation with dbname (but some parts of > our code take is as instance name). > Rhn_enviroment is even more simplier: > SQL> select * from RHN_ENVIRONMENT; > NAME DESCRIPTION > ---- ----------- > LICENSE Licensed Software Model > > Only part of Spacewalk, which use it is rhn_config_macro table, which is > AFAIK used only by monitoring. Main server do not use it.
I'm a little confused as to what the purpose of the rhn_db_environment and rhn_environment are used for? > > So here comes the question: Do we want to deploy Spacewalk in highly > clustered environment with several databases or not? May I remove those > tables in question or not? > If I do not get any objection till Wednesday I will start working on the > removal. Why wouldn't we want to have a highly clustered environment with several databases? That sounds like a useful feature, is it only used by monitoring? Can we have this type of environment by using configuration settings instead of a database table? jesus _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
