Summary: amfnd : speed up shutdown of standby SC upon failover during its shutdown [#942] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #942 Peer Reviewer(s):AMF contributors Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> Affected branch(es): ALL 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 090a773cd7c171539c18f662996d18ebc01759fe Author: [email protected] Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 17:04:17 +0530 amfnd : speed up shutdown of standby SC upon failover during its shutdown [#942] Applications face problems in accessing opensaf services during shutdown of opensaf on both the controllers. As soon as active controller completes failover happens. Standby AMFND ignores active modification of middleware and continue with its own pace of shutting down opensaf. Since this process of standby controller shutdown mauy take long time, application can have problems in accessing opensaf services. AMF should speed up shutdown on stanby controller if it gets failover request during opensaf shutdown. It means all the components should be cleaned up as soon as possible. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/su.cc | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Tested by delaying response of removal callbacks during opensaf shutdown of both the controllers, such that active controller failover request is received by standby controller. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- Observed cleanup of all the components on standby controller as soon as the failover request arrives. Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack from any reviewer. Arch Built Started Linux distro ------------------------------------------- mips n n mips64 n n x86 n n x86_64 y y 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
