Re: [Engine-devel] [Users] Features requests for the setup/configuration utilities - feedback requested

From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, Users(a)ovirt.org, "Jiri Belka" <jbelka(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 11:48:51 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Users] Features requests for the setup/configuration utilities - feedback requested On 03/15/2013 08:07 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: "Jiri Belka" <jbelka(a)redhat.com&gt; >> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, Users(a)ovirt.org >> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 1:27:32 PM >> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Users] Features requests for the >> setup/configuration utilities - feedback requested >> >> On 03/14/2013 04:55 PM, Jiri Belka wrote: >>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 14:44:48 +0002 >>> Alex Lourie <alourie(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jiri >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Jiri Belka <jbelka(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>>> I'll talk about RHEVM but it's probably related to oVirt too. >>>>> >>>>> As rhevm installs all deps, I'm curious why versionlock.list is >>>>> populated after rhevm-setup and _not_dirrectly during >>>>> installation >>>>> (maybe because you would need to hardcode versions into rhevm >>>>> package?). It took me tens of minutes to figure out why is >>>>> upgrade >>>>> working differently now, just because I did _NOT_ do >>>>> rhevm-setup >>>>> after >>>>> clean install because I was thinking I know what files are >>>>> important >>>>> and was restoring them from a tarball. >>>>> >>>>> I think running rhevm-setup if you just want to restore is >>>>> stupid. If >>>>> we would know 100% which files are involved, just install, >>>>> restore >>>>> from >>>>> backup, restore DB should be sufficient, without loosing time >>>>> with >>>>> rhevm-setup which just writes there and here... :) >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't really follow you here. What are you restoring with >>>> rhevm-setup? >>> >>> My previous (wrong) procedure to restore old version was: >>> >>> rhevm-cleanup, yum remove rhevm\*, rm -rf $dirs, yum install >>> rhevm\*, >>> tar xvzpf /backup.tgz, ./restore.sh for DB... >>> >>> which was not fully correct as I haven't >>> known /etc/yum/plugin.d/versionlock.list is touched by >>> rhevm-setup >>> as >>> well and thus yum was working very strange during next normal >>> upgrade. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Users mailing list >>> Users(a)ovirt.org >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>> >> >> moran/ofer - i remember some discussions on moving from version >> lock >> to >> a yum plugin. i.e., yum will not update the packages if not >> getting >> some >> parameter from engine-upgrade (but will show updates exist), but >> they >> will behave normally other than that? > > We cannot mention yum specific features in setup context any > more... this is part of the mission. > > We should reconsider the locking of version - no product uses this. > > After upgrade of packages, product should either know not to start > or upgrade the database when restarted, or better know to work > with older schema. > > The version lock should be removed as soon as possible. > > Alon > I think we can remove the version lock (after relevant preparations/changes)

I still think a yum plugin to not yum update rpms which are part of the engine without a special script/yum paramter invoking them) is worthwhile, since i don't like the concept of someone running yum update, only to find out the upgrade had an issue a week later when restarting the service.