[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH 0024] ipa-replica-manage: added --suffix option for certain commands
Jan Cholasta
jcholast at redhat.com
Wed Mar 16 09:22:24 UTC 2016
On 16.3.2016 08:33, Stanislav Laznicka wrote:
> On 03/15/2016 12:47 PM, Petr Vobornik wrote:
>> On 03/15/2016 07:25 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>> On 14.3.2016 17:18, Petr Vobornik wrote:
>>>> On 03/14/2016 04:55 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>> On 14.3.2016 16:26, Petr Vobornik wrote:
>>>>>> On 03/14/2016 12:57 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>>>> On 14.3.2016 12:50, Martin Basti wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 14.03.2016 12:05, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 11.3.2016 10:39, Stanislav Laznicka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please see the patch attached. Contrary to the discussion at
>>>>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4987 I also added the
>>>>>>>>>> suffix
>>>>>>>>>> option for clean_ruv command. If this command is available for
>>>>>>>>>> normal
>>>>>>>>>> RUVs, it should probably be available for CS-RUVs as well (or
>>>>>>>>>> deprecated
>>>>>>>>>> for both with advised use of clean_dangling_ruv).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ipa-csreplica-manage is used to manage the CA suffix, so
>>>>>>>>> ipa-csreplica-manage should be extended instead of adding --suffix
>>>>>>>>> option to ipa-replica-manage. Having half of the CA suffix
>>>>>>>>> managed by
>>>>>>>>> ipa-replica-manage and the other half by ipa-replica-manage is
>>>>>>>>> confusing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Honza
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is a design document about deprecating
>>>>>>>> ipa-csreplica-manage and
>>>>>>>> move part of its responsibilities to ipa-replica-manage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.freeipa.org/page/V4/Manage_replication_topology_4_4#ipa.28cs.29replica_manange_changes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So patch is compatible with design.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The design is wrong then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't agree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Either do it in ipa-csreplica-manage, or make *all*
>>>>>>> ipa-replica-manage
>>>>>>> sub-commands respect the --suffix option. Anything else is
>>>>>>> inconsistent
>>>>>>> mess.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's the idea for domain level 1. There is little value in
>>>>>> extending
>>>>>> behavior(managing replication agreements) in domain level 0.
>>>>>
>>>>> Domain level 0 is still relevant, it won't go away anytime soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Main idea is to not care about suffixes and work with all suffixes
>>>>>> right
>>>>>> away. This is reflected in clean-dangling-ruv command and these
>>>>>> extensions are its counterpart - to enable disabling the run. We
>>>>>> mostly
>>>>>> care about replica IDs not suffixes they belong to. IMO --suffix
>>>>>> option
>>>>>> is not necessary and is mostly for debugging.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of the reasons why we have all the RUV commands is a mess after
>>>>>> uninstallation when somebody forgets/ignores to run
>>>>>> `ipa-csreplica-manage del $server` or also `ipa-replica-manage del
>>>>>> $server` before uninstallation of replica. Users then usually run
>>>>>> `ipa-replica-manage del $server` --force --clean` but
>>>>>> `ipa-csreplica-manage del $server` can't be run after it. Changes in
>>>>>> 4.3 and 4.4 tries to prevent this situation (e.g. by calling
>>>>>> equivalent
>>>>>> of `ipa-cs+replica-manage del` from `ipa-server-install
>>>>>> --uninstall`).
>>>>>> But until then mess is cleaned on all servers, we should deal with it
>>>>>> with the most convenient way - hiding implementation details.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is actually exposing implementation details by forcing the
>>>>> user to
>>>>> use a different command based on the domain level.
>>>>
>>>> What different commands?
>>>
>>> ipa-replica-manage vs ipa-csreplica-manage cs API commands.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Please explain to me how any of the above requires us to introduce
>>>>> additional inconsistencies and bad UX to IPA.
>>>>
>>>> What bad UX?
>>>
>>> This is how replicas are managed in domain level 0 without the patch:
>>>
>>> suffix both domain ca
>>>
>>> list - i-r-m i-c-m
>>>
>>> list-ruv - i-r-m -
>>>
>>> connect - i-r-m i-c-m
>>>
>>> diconnect - i-r-m i-c-m
>>>
>>> del - i-r-m i-c-m
>>>
>>> re-initialize - i-r-m i-c-m
>>>
>>> force-sync - i-r-m i-c-m
>>>
>>> clean-ruv - i-r-m -
>>>
>>> abort-clean-ruv - i-r-m -
>>>
>>> list-clean-ruv i-r-m - -
>>
>> isnt' it?:
>> - i-r-m -
>>
> It is AFAIK.
It's not, the command searches all 'cleanallruv' and 'abort cleanallruv'
tasks without filtering by suffix.
>>
>>>
>>> clean-dangling-ruv i-r-m - -
>>>
>>> (i-r-m == ipa-replica-manage, etc.)
>>>
>>>
>>> This is how replicas are managed in domain level 1 with the patch:
>>>
>>> suffix both domain ca
>>>
>>> list - i-r-m i-c-m
>>> s-f s-f -ts=d s-f -ts=c
>>>
>>> list-ruv i-r-m i-r-m -s=d i-r-m -s=c
>>>
>>> connect - ts-a d ts-a c
>>>
>>> diconnect - ts-d d ts-d c
>>>
>>> del i-r-m - -
>>> s-d - -
>>>
>>> re-initialize - i-r-m i-c-m
>>> - ts-r d ts-r c
>>>
>>> force-sync - i-r-m i-c-m
>>>
>>> clean-ruv i-r-m i-r-m -s=d i-r-m -s=c
>>>
>>> abort-clean-ruv i-r-m i-r-m -s=d i-r-m -s=c
>>>
>>> list-clean-ruv i-r-m - -
>>>
>>> clean-dangling-ruv i-r-m - -
>>>
>>> (s-f -ts=d == server-find --topologysuffixes=domain, etc.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe it's just me, but I fail to see the pattern here and find this
>>> very confusing. (Note that I'm not trying to blame this particular patch
>>> for this, I'm just frustrated from the overall state.)
>>
>> Yes, backwards compatibility(bc) makes a mess there. But look at the
>> state in following way (bc hidden):
>>
>> suffix both domain ca
>>
>> == Normal operations (i.e. all in API) ==
>>
>> list s-f s-f -ts=d s-f -ts=c
>>
>>
>>
>> connect - ts-a d ts-a c
>>
>> diconnect - ts-d d ts-d c
>>
>> del s-d - -
>>
>> == Debugging & Fixing ==
>>
>> re-initialize ts-r d ts-r c
>> - i-r-m i-c-m
>>
>> force-sync - i-r-m i-c-m
>>
>>
>> list-ruv i-r-m
>>
>> clean-ruv i-r-m
>>
>> abort-clean-ruv i-r-m
>>
>> list-clean-ruv i-r-m - -
>>
>> clean-dangling-ruv i-r-m - -
>>
>>
>> Then we can see that only issue is force-sync operations which use
>> case I don't really understand and with re-initialize which should be
>> improved in API to be more usable (currently there is no progress
>> status).
>>
>> Note: "debugging and fixing" is basically the same on both domain levels.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is supposed to be used in following way:
>>>> ipa-replica-manage clean-dangling-ruvs
>>>>
>>>> If from whatever reason some clean ruv task is not finished then:
>>>> ipa-replica-manage list-clean-ruv
>>>> [all running task for all suffixes]
>>>> ipa-replica-manage abort-clean-ruv REPLICATION_ID
>>>>
>>>> Nothing else. Works for both domain levels and suffixes from a single
>>>> tool. Again, --suffix option is not important.
>>>
>>> This changes the default behavior in domain level 0. I though we are not
>>> extending domain level 0 anymore, you said it yourself in a comment
>>> above.
>>
>> I meant that we don't need to invest into new features in domain level
>> 0 but RUV commands doesn't need to behave differently on various
>> domain levels. There is no reason.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note: clean-ruv subcommand could be probably marked as deprecated or be
>>>> discouraged to use.
>>>
>>> If the commands are deprecated, why further extend them?
>>
>> No reason, clean-ruv subcommand doesn't need to be extended. Maybe to
>> have similar behavior as rest of ruv commands.
>>
> It was exactly for that reason. If there's abort-clean-ruv which allows
> aborting the clean operation for both suffixes, it seems rather natural
> to have its counterpart to be able to do the same (as long as it's not
> deprecated, which we might do right now if it seems like a good thing to
> do).
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the patch doesn't implement it, then it's wrong.
>>>
>>> The patch changes the default behavior of the sub-commands and extends
>>> them even in domain level 0. I would think at least that should be
>>> fixed.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>>
> Given the question of deprecating clean-ruv is answered by now, I should
> also ask why.
We discussed this with Petr offline. We agreed that it's actually
desirable to make all clean-ruv commands behave the same on all domain
levels. We also agreed that it's desirable to make the normal operation
commands behave the same on all domain levels, which is currently not
true for the connect and disconnect commands, but that's unrelated to
this patch.
Therefore, I'm OK with the approach, as long as you either remove the
--suffix option altogether, or add it to the remaining clean-ruv
commands (list-clean-ruv and clean-dangling-ruv). I would personally
just remove it, because as Petr pointed out, it's not actually necessary
for anything.
--
Jan Cholasta
More information about the Freeipa-devel
mailing list