8:47 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com>, engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 12:14:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Change in ovirt-engine[master]: core: enable to decrease DC
compatibility...
On 03/23/2014 12:13 PM, Eli Mesika wrote:
>
> So, as far a I understand for resolving this bug the following is OK :
>
> Block downgrading if there are Hosts or Networks (other than the default
> management network) or SD in the DC when downgrading.
yes
I don't think it is enough. There is a need to verify the management network
wasn't modified to use unsupported features in the new data-center.
On the same matter, we can allow downgrading if all of the networks in the
data center are using only features that are supported on the target DC version
and not to restrict it only to the management network.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Livnat Peer" <lpeer(a)redhat.com>
>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 8:33:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Change in ovirt-engine[master]: core: enable
>> to decrease DC compatibility...
>>
>> On 03/20/2014 09:20 PM, Moti Asayag wrote:
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Livnat Peer" <lpeer(a)redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:44:07 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Change in ovirt-engine[master]: core:
enable
>>>> to decrease DC compatibility...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Livnat Peer" <lpeer(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:33:45 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Change in ovirt-engine[master]: core:
>>>>> enable
>>>>> to
>>>>> decrease DC compatibility...
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/12/2014 10:20 PM, Moti Asayag wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> From: "Livnat Peer" <lpeer(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:42:44 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Change in ovirt-engine[master]:
core:
>>>>>>> enable
>>>>>>> to decrease DC compatibility...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03/12/2014 11:59 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 03/12/2014 12:26 AM, emesika(a)redhat.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Eli Mesika has submitted this change and it was
merged.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Change subject: core: enable to decrease DC
compatibility...
>>>>>>>>>
......................................................................
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> core: enable to decrease DC compatibility...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> enable to decrease DC compatibility version if DC
has no clusters
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This patch enables to decrease the DC compatibility
version if DC
>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>> clusters.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Eli - just saw this. I'm pretty sure it would be
*bad* to downgrade
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> DC
>>>>>>>> version if it has storage domains as well. not sure if
this is
>>>>>>>> checked
>>>>>>>> already or not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> may also be an issue with some logical network
features.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of the network features are driven from cluster level,
we enable
>>>>>>> using the features on all DC level (actually >=3.1) but
actually
>>>>>>> enable
>>>>>>> /disable the feature when attaching the network to a
cluster.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So from network perspective I think it should be fine to
downgrade
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> DC level even if there are networks in the DC (at least now
this
>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>> change in future versions).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually we block adding or updating networks if the feature is
not
>>>>>> supported
>>>>>> on the network's DC level, for example: STP, Jumbo frames
and non-vm
>>>>>> network.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From which DC level we support STP? Jumbo frames? non-vm network?
>>>>> isn't
>>>>> all of them supported in >=3.1 ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, mainly the problem with downgrading a DC to 3.0.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I had a discussion with Mike (cc'ed) about several possible solutions
>>> for the networks compatibility within the data-center.
>>>
>>> The first proposed solution would utilize the NetworkUpdateValidator,
>>> a validation utility that verifies the compatibility of a network
>>> to the data-center. This solution preserves the same behaviour as today,
>>> that the features of network-level are dictated by the DC version. No
>>> need to reimplement any logic in the decrease DC version flow, just use
>>> an existing one to be applied for any network within the DC.
>>>
>>> The second solution suggests we allow any settings of a network, and
>>> compatibility enforcement is done on attaching the network to the
>>> clusters.
>>> This modifies the existing behaviour and expands the capabilities of the
>>> engine to support advanced network feature in advanced cluster within an
>>> old data center (i.e. cluster 3.4 in 3.0 data-center could and probably
>>> should use non-vm network, jumbo-frames and more).
>>> This option requires more work in add/update network and attach network
>>> to
>>> cluster
>>> flows, both on the backend and UI. Specifically since by default a new
>>> network
>>> created in a DC is being attached to all of the clusters.
>>> Perhaps the second option deserves to be treated as RFE and not as a bug
>>> fix.
>>>
>>> Thoughts ?
>>>
>>
>> The second approach you suggested is equivalent to creating networks in
>> cluster level vs. DC level, which is used today.
>>
>> We should consider that for 4.0 and think on the pros and cons of doing
>> so.
>>
>> In general for this specific discussion I think a simple block on DC
>> downgrade should be enough.
>>
>>> Moti
>>>
>>>>>> Therefore if the management network was configured with any of
those
>>>>>> feature,
>>>>>> there is a need to either block the action or to
'initialize' the
>>>>>> network
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> the default settings (as new network being added).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In general I believe the use case for this patch is mostly
for empty
>>>>>>> DCs
>>>>>>> so for simplicity we should block it if there are networks
or SD in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> DC when downgrading.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Livnat
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Change-Id:
I73284f641b7f80b380b39efbbd7b4566f55119b6
>>>>>>>>> Bug-Url:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057029
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Eli Mesika
<emesika(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> M
>>>>>>>>>
backend/manager/modules/bll/src/main/java/org/ovirt/engine/core/bll/storage/UpdateStoragePoolCommand.java
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Approvals:
>>>>>>>>> Eli Mesika: Verified
>>>>>>>>> Ravi Nori: Looks good to me, but someone else
must approve
>>>>>>>>> Yair Zaslavsky: Looks good to me, approved
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Engine-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Engine-devel mailing list
>>> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Engine-devel mailing list
>> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Engine-devel mailing list
> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel