cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [4.6] RC1 soon ?
Date Thu, 30 Jul 2015 19:51:24 GMT
leasure time is on

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Mike Tutkowski
<mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Sure, I can revert it and leave it for your leisure to find an acceptable
> fix to satisfy FindBugs.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I am now thinking of how to isolate this code to write a proper test.
>> This is not going to be successful tonight, while the original seven
>> samurai is on tv. Maybe reverting is the best option and we live with
>> findbugs regression for a day. I will think of a way to fix this
>> tomorrow wit a more clear head.
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:33 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > But reintroduced the vulnerability that findbugs was complaining
>> > about...
>> > I think the problem is in this bit:
>> >
>> >                 int i=0;
>> >                 for (Map.Entry<String, String> detail :
>> > details.entrySet()) {
>> >                     pstmt.setString(++i,detail.getKey());
>> >                     pstmt.setString(++i,detail.getValue());
>> >                 }
>> >
>> > ++i should have been i++ in both cases. I messed those in my review,
>> > sorry
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >> No problem, Daan. :)
>> >>
>> >> Just from an empirical standpoint, though, reverting the commit in my
>> >> local
>> >> repo fixed the problem.
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Daan Hoogland
>> >> <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> never mind that again, answerring to fast as I probably do one out of
>> >>> two or three times :( Looking further...
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Daan Hoogland
>> >>> <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > Mike, I am looking at the commit and it makes perfect sense as
the
>> >>> > the
>> >>> > prior situation was creating a prepared statement based on dynamicly
>> >>> > added strings. The only queer thing is that the int i = 1 is
>> >>> > replaced
>> >>> > with i = 1, reusing the loop counter instead of hiding it. Maybe
>> >>> > this
>> >>> > is the problem
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 8:55 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> I see the problem.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> The way a SQL statement was constructed was changed by commit
>> >>> >> b84093f691ae0b09d2c525d50f2e2d200c709b2c:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=blobdiff;f=engine/schema/src/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/datastore/db/PrimaryDataStoreDaoImpl.java;h=d3c29f70d6ab56379c2436b5cafc933049200f31;hp=faf5291554a68506b14438a7e1cda61cd4c3cc0c;hb=b84093f691ae0b09d2c525d50f2e2d200c709b2c;hpb=1407033cc2e0742653d82bb0181c041b31253693
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> and no longer makes any sense
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> SELECT storage_pool.* from storage_pool LEFT JOIN
>> >>> >> storage_pool_details
>> >>> >> ON
>> >>> >> storage_pool.id = storage_pool_details.pool_id WHERE
>> >>> >> storage_pool.removed is
>> >>> >> null and storage_pool.status = 'Up' and storage_pool.data_center_id
>> >>> >> = 1
>> >>> >> and
>> >>> >> storage_pool.scope = 'ZONE' and (((storage_pool_details.name=1)
AND
>> >>> >> (storage_pool_details.value=** NOT SPECIFIED **))) GROUP BY
>> >>> >> storage_pool_details.pool_id HAVING
>> >>> >> COUNT(storage_pool_details.name) >=
>> >>> >> **
>> >>> >> NOT SPECIFIED **
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I think I'm just going to revert this commit. It was related
to a
>> >>> >> change put
>> >>> >> in at the request of FindBugs.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I've CCed the relevant participants in the commit in case they
wish
>> >>> >> to
>> >>> >> re-evaluate the FindBugs request and resubmit a fix.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> >> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> FYI that I get the same error message when trying to attach
a data
>> >>> >>> disk
>> >>> >>> that is based on zone-wide primary storage.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> >>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> I'm actually having trouble creating a VM whose root
disk runs on
>> >>> >>>> zone-wide primary storage.
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> This is definitely a blocker for 4.6. I'm just beginning
to look
>> >>> >>>> into
>> >>> >>>> this, but this is the error message I receive:
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> findZoneWideStoragePoolsByTags:Exception:No value specified
for
>> >>> >>>> parameter
>> >>> >>>> 4
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion
>> >>> >>>> <pdion891@apache.org>
>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> Hi,
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> I've create this jira filter[1] for the Release
Manager, based
>> >>> >>>>> on
>> >>> >>>>> it,
>> >>> >>>>> there
>> >>> >>>>> would be only 4 maybe just 3 blockers on 4.6. Based
on this,
>> >>> >>>>> should
>> >>> >>>>> we
>> >>> >>>>> consider placing a target date for RC1 somewhere
like end of
>> >>> >>>>> August
>> >>> >>>>> ?
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> What's missing and to do in 4.6 as far as I know:
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> 1. Basic documentation of new features,
>> >>> >>>>> 2. Decide if we let it in master and freeze merge
during RC ?
>> >>> >>>>> 3. Build all job as 4.6 in jenkins ?
>> >>> >>>>> 4. Organize a QA-party, like old time lan-party
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> --
>> >>> >>>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> >>>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> >>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> >>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> >>>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> --
>> >>> >>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> >>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> >>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> >>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> >>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> >> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> >> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> >> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> >> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Daan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Daan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Mike Tutkowski
>> >> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >> o: 303.746.7302
>> >> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Daan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daan
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Tutkowski
> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™



-- 
Daan

Mime
View raw message