Hi, On 1/29/2016 11:45 AM, Nhat Pham wrote: > - The behavior of application will be consistent with other saf services > like imm/amf behavior during headless state. > [Nhat] I'm not clear what you mean about "consistent"?
In the obscene of Director (SC's) , what is expected return values of SAF API should ( all services ) , which are not in aposition to provide service at that moment. I think all services should return same SAF ERRS., I thinks currently we don't have it , may be Anders Widel will help us. -AVM On 1/29/2016 11:45 AM, Nhat Pham wrote: > Hi Mahesh, > > Please see the attachment for the README. Let me know if there is any more > information required. > > Regarding your comments: > - during headless state applications may behave like during CPND restart > case > [Nhat] Headless state and CPND restart are different events. Thus, the > behavior is different. > Headless state is a case where both SCs go down. > > - The behavior of application will be consistent with other saf services > like imm/amf behavior during headless state. > [Nhat] I'm not clear what you mean about "consistent"? > > Best regards, > Nhat Pham > > -----Original Message----- > From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 11:12 AM > To: Nhat Pham <nhat.p...@dektech.com.au>; anders.wid...@ericsson.com > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Support preserving and > recovering checkpoint replicas during headless state V2 [#1621] > > Hi Nhat Pham, > > I stared reviewing this patch , so can please provide README file with > scope and limitations , that will help to define testing/reviewing scope . > > Following are minimum things we can keep in mind while reviewing/accepting > patch , > > - Not effecting existing functionality > - during headless state applications may behave like during CPND restart > case > - The minimum functionally of application works > - The behavior of application will be consistent with > other saf services like imm/amf behavior during headless state. > > So please do provide any additional detailed in README if any of the above > is deviated , that allow users to know about the limitations/deviation. > > -AVM > > On 1/4/2016 3:15 PM, Nhat Pham wrote: >> Summary: cpsv: Support preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas >> during headless state [#1621] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1621 >> Peer Reviewer(s): mahesh.va...@oracle.com; anders.wid...@ericsson.com >> Pull request to: mahesh.va...@oracle.com Affected branch(es): default >> Development branch: default >> >> -------------------------------- >> 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 faec4a4445a4c23e8f630857b19aabb43b5af18d >> Author: Nhat Pham <nhat.p...@dektech.com.au> >> Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:34:33 +0700 >> >> cpsv: Support preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas during >> headless state [#1621] >> >> Background: >> ---------- This enhancement supports to preserve checkpoint replicas > in case >> both SCs down (headless state) and recover replicas in case one of > SCs up >> again. If both SCs goes down, checkpoint replicas on surviving nodes > still >> remain. When a SC is available again, surviving replicas are > automatically >> registered to the SC checkpoint database. Content in surviving > replicas are >> intacted and synchronized to new replicas. >> >> When no SC is available, client API calls changing checkpoint > configuration >> which requires SC communication, are rejected. Client API calls > reading and >> writing existing checkpoint replicas still work. >> >> Limitation: The CKPT service does not support recovering checkpoints > in >> following cases: >> - The checkpoint which is unlinked before headless. >> - The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating on SC. >> - The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating on a PL > and this >> PL restarts during headless state. In this cases, the checkpoint > replica is >> destroyed. The fault code SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE is returned when the > client >> accesses the checkpoint in these cases. The client must re-open the >> checkpoint. >> >> While in headless state, accessing checkpoint replicas does not work > if the >> node which hosts the active replica goes down. It will back working > when a >> SC available again. >> >> Solution: >> --------- The solution for this enhancement includes 2 parts: >> >> 1. To destroy un-recoverable checkpoint described above when both > SCs are >> down: When both SCs are down, the CPND deletes un-recoverable > checkpoint >> nodes and replicas on PLs. Then it requests CPA to destroy > corresponding >> checkpoint node by using new message CPA_EVT_ND2A_CKPT_DESTROY >> >> 2. To update CPD with checkpoint information When an active SC is up > after >> headless, CPND will update CPD with checkpoint information by using > new >> message CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_INFO_UPDATE instead of using >> CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE. This is because the CPND will create new > ckpt_id >> for the checkpoint which might be different with the current ckpt id > if the >> CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE is used. The CPD collects checkpoint > information >> within 6s. During this updating time, following requests is rejected > with >> fault code SA_AIS_ERR_TRY_AGAIN: >> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE >> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_UNLINK >> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_ACTIVE_SET >> - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_RDSET >> >> >> Complete diffstat: >> ------------------ >> osaf/libs/agents/saf/cpa/cpa_proc.c | 52 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/cpsv_edu.c | 43 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_cb.h | 3 ++ >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_imm.h | 1 + >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_proc.h | 7 ++++ >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_tmr.h | 3 +- >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_cb.h | 1 + >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_init.h | 2 + >> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpsv_evt.h | 20 +++++++++++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/Makefile.am | 3 +- >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_evt.c | 229 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_imm.c | 112 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_init.c | 20 ++++++++++++- >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_proc.c | 309 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_tmr.c | 7 ++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_db.c | 16 ++++++++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c | 22 +++++++++++++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_init.c | 23 ++++++++++++++- >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_mds.c | 13 ++++++++ >> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_proc.c | 314 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >> 20 files changed, 1189 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) >> >> >> Testing Commands: >> ----------------- >> - >> >> Testing, Expected Results: >> -------------------------- >> - >> >> >> Conditions of Submission: >> ------------------------- >> <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>> >> >> >> Arch Built Started Linux distro >> ------------------------------------------- >> mips n n >> mips64 n n >> x86 n n >> x86_64 n n >> 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. >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
