[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH][RFC] 7 automember rebuild nowait feature added

[Petr Viktorin]

On 03/20/2014 04:22 PM, Misnyovszki Adam wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:19:51 +0100
> Misnyovszki Adam <amisnyov at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:26:15 -0400
>> Rob Crittenden <rcritten at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Misnyovszki Adam wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> automember-rebuild uses asynchronous 389 task, and returned
>>>> success even if the task didn't run. This patch fixes this issue
>>>> adding a --nowait parameter to 'ipa automember-rebuild',
>>>> defaulting to False, thus when the script runs without it, it
>>>> waits for the 'nstaskexitcode' attribute, which means the task
>>>> has finished, according to
>>>> http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Task_Invocation_Via_LDAP#Implementation.
>>>> Old usage can be enabled using --nowait.
>>>>
>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4239
>>>>
>>>> Request for comments:
>>>> - Should I add a parameter to specify the polling time? (now 1ms)
>>>> - Should I add a parameter to specify the maximum polling number?
>>>> Now if something fails about creating the task, it polls forever.
>>>> - Obviously, if these parameters should be added, there should be
>>>> a reasonable default for them (~ Required=False, Default=X).
>>>
>>> I don't think you need a polling time, esp since this is hidden from
>>> the user, but I think that is probably too short and you may end up
>>> hammering the LDAP server.
>>>
>>> I also wonder if there should be some maximum wait time. I don't
>>> like loops that can never exit. I'm at a loss for what that time
>>> should be though. And we'd need to spell out that we gave up
>>> waiting, not that the task necessarily failed. So rather than
>>> having a polling time option, rename nowait into wait_for=20, so
>>> wait for 20 seconds. Or something like that.
>>>
>>> I'd suggest using get_entry since you already know the full DN and
>>> there is only ever one. It would make this much more readable.
>>>
>>> I wonder if some top-level documentation should be added to flesh
>>> this out some more. This does, for example, return False in one
>>> case. The meaning for that should be spelled out.
>>>
>>> rob
>>
>> Hi,
>> personally I would keep --no-wait, with a delay of 1 seconds, and a
>> maximum waiting time for 60 seconds. Questions is, do we need to
>> parameterize with other parameters(wait-for to the maximum time,
>> and/or poll-delay for the delay time, both not required), or it is
>> not a case which worth to develop?
>> Greets
>> Adam
>
> Hi,
> here are the corrections Petr asked, also the other patch conatins the
> plugin registration refactor.


Thanks!

You forgot an alternate summary for the --no-wait case. (Make sure to 
output the DN in this case, so it's possible to poll for it.)



Instead of `task['nstaskexitcode'][0]` please use 
`task.single_value['nstaskexitcode']`.

Here:

    raise errors.DatabaseError(
        desc=_("Automember rebuild membership task failed"),
        info=_("nstaskexitcode = '%s'" % str(task['nstaskexitcode'][0])))

there's no need to call str() on %'s argument.
Also, use natural language (like "Task exit code: %s"), otherwise 
there's no need to mark the message for translation.


-- 
Petr³