ok,
I was wondering about side effects of the checks.
thanks,
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
wrote:
> No big difference. But its better to evaluate if the network is eligible
> for the check, before retrieving DHCP provider. IN your code snippet you
> might retrieve DHCP provi
No big difference. But its better to evaluate if the network is eligible
for the check, before retrieving DHCP provider. IN your code snippet you
might retrieve DHCP provider only to discover later that the check is not
needed at all.
-Alena.
On 2/8/14, 7:07 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote:
>Alena,
>
Alena,
I added unit tests and made a review request for you,
https://reviews.apache.org/r/17872/
I have a question though. I can see some small the semantic differnce
between the following two snippits but is only in the evaluation order
of the conditions under which to execute, not in the logic.
Alena,
I added unit tests and made a review request for you,
https://reviews.apache.org/r/17872/
I have a question though. I can see some small the semantic differnce between
the following two snippits but is only in the evaluation order of the
conditions under which to execute, not in the log
sure, will try to find a spot asap. and write unit tests to simulate
those two situations.
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
wrote:
> Daan,
>
> Here is how it should look:
>
> //1) Make all the checks that used to exist in original code + if DHCP
> service is enabled on the networ
Daan,
Here is how it should look:
//1) Make all the checks that used to exist in original code + if DHCP
service is enabled on the network
if (vm.getType() == Type.User && network.getTrafficType() ==
TrafficType.Guest && isLastNicInSubnet(nic) && network.getGuestType() ==
GuestType.Shared &&
_ne
H Alena,
I am just trying to fix an old contribution that I applied as it
seemed not to harm in a basic test. revert didn't work so I am looking
for a quick remedy. The original patch does it for shared only. I
don't care either way. Lets do the best thing.
the code now
if (vm.getType()
Daan,
1) What is the reason you execute this code snippet just for Shared
networks?
2) As I suggested in my prev email, before retrieving Dhcpprovider, you
should check if dhcp service is enabled on the network. Use method
areServicesSupportedInNetwork
From NetworkModel to check that.
-Alena.
Hope this is not blocking at the moment so I can take the time to add
a unit test. If not I have the code ready to ship. please bug me.
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> thanks Murali, will do
>
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:58 AM, murali reddy wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at
thanks Murali, will do
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:58 AM, murali reddy wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>
>> Alena,
>>
>> The revert didn't apply. Would the folowing do the trick?
>>
>> if (vm.getType() == Type.User
>> && network.getTrafficType()
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> Alena,
>
> The revert didn't apply. Would the folowing do the trick?
>
> if (vm.getType() == Type.User
> && network.getTrafficType() == TrafficType.Guest
> && network.getGuestType() == GuestType.Shared)
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 9:56 PM
> To: Alena Prokharchyk
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; eiz...@infoblox.com
> Subject: Re: commit 6523c068695d0431070060667c222eb40d54b14d breaks
Alena,
The revert didn't apply. Would the folowing do the trick?
if (vm.getType() == Type.User
&& network.getTrafficType() == TrafficType.Guest
&& network.getGuestType() == GuestType.Shared) {
// remove the dhcpservice ip if this is the last nic
second thought,
Soheils mail bounces and the commit does not refer a ticket from jira.
I am going to revert. I should have been more vigilant. sorry.
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> will do Alena,
>
> thanks for the headsup
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Alena Prokha
will do Alena,
thanks for the headsup
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
wrote:
> Soheil/Daan,
>
> The commit in the subject breaks network System vms destroy (VR, SSVM,
> CPVM), resulting in the network removal failures. Following line replacement
> causes the failure:
>
> - if
15 matches
Mail list logo
