[wildfly-dev] Migration management operation - open questions

[Ladislav Thon]

I agree 100% with a single note: before "they can fix up any issues",
they have to know that there are issues. If the :migrate operation knows
that there will be issues (e.g. valves present in the old subsystem), it
would be _very nice_ if it provided a warning :-) The earlier is the
user aware of [possible] issues, the better.

I believe that the :migrate operations _could_ return these warnings in
the operation result, but since Brian thinks that this is problematic,
I'll have to leave the details up to you, guys :-)

LT

On 11.8.2015 04:05, Stuart Douglas wrote:
> I don't think it should fail, imagine how frustrating that would be from
> a users perspective, as the only course of action they have is to delete
> the relevant resource and try again. It would be much more user friendly
> IMHO to just let the op complete and then they can fix up any issues,
> they will still end up in the same situation, just with less work on
> their part.
> 
> Stuart
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 at 10:40 Jason Greene <jason.greene at redhat.com
> <mailto:jason.greene at redhat.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
>>     On Aug 10, 2015, at 5:23 PM, Stuart Douglas
>>     <stuart.w.douglas at gmail.com <mailto:stuart.w.douglas at gmail.com>>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>
>>         > 3. What is the expected behavior when part which was configured as part of the legacy subsystem is now configured outside of new subsystem having just reference to it? Should the migration operation create the additional configuration even when it is manipulating with configuration parts outside of the subsystem?
>>         > -- For example ssl configuration of https connector/listener. In Web subsystem it is part of the connector configuration, in Undertow it is just reference to security realm and it is defined as part of the security realms, should new security realm be created with equivalent configuration to the one in legacy Web subsystem?
>>         >
>>
>>         I'll let Stuart respond to this. Looking at the
>>         WebMigrateOperation (the
>>         handler for the web subsystem migrate op) it looks to be adding a
>>         security realm.
>>
>>
>>     Yes, at the moment I do create new security realms, and also add
>>     the IO subsystem with a default config if it is not already
>>     present. The names for the security realm will
>>     be jbossweb-migration-security-realm(n), where n is the lowest
>>     number that does not result in a name collision.
>>
> 
>     As an example of the fail-or-warn question, unless I am reading the
>     code wrong, it looks like things which don’t have a mapping (e.g.
>     tomcat valves) are ignored. Should the migration op fail if one is
>     used, or should it return a warning?
> 
>     --
>     Jason T. Greene
>     WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
>     JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>