[WFCORE-6503]:Add support for unmanaged deployments with YAML extension. #5860
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
the
deps-ok
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
ehsavoie
force-pushed
the
WFCORE-6503
branch
from
826b453
to
18a3f13
Compare
|
For WARN message it seems to be logging some null values. For example: for yaml: I should log the name of yaml tag which is ignored. |
ehsavoie
force-pushed
the
WFCORE-6503
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d00ce87
to
3d5976c
Compare
mnovak1
reviewed
Mar 1, 2024
controller/src/main/java/org/jboss/as/controller/logging/ControllerLogger.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
ehsavoie
force-pushed
the
WFCORE-6503
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cf04996
to
fd8e69e
Compare
ehsavoie
force-pushed
the
WFCORE-6503
branch
6 times, most recently
from
c6dcfa8
to
b3b2923
Compare
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
yersan
reviewed
Mar 18, 2024
controller/src/main/java/org/jboss/as/controller/logging/ControllerLogger.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
bstansberry
added
Feature
|
Hello @bstansberry, you added "Feature" and "missing-reqs" labels to this PR. So far we are treating this as an enhancement, do you want this to be treated as a Feature Request instead? There is more information about this on the Jira. |
|
Core -> Full Integration Build 13373 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 34bacd1 Failed tests |
|
Core -> Full Integration Build 13666 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 04fa197 Failed tests |
yersan
removed
the
missing-reqs
yersan
reviewed
Apr 4, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added some comments to think about whether some stuff that could be moved to simply a bit the changes on the reload handlers and ModelControllerImpl, they can be evolved later, but it took me some time to figure out why we needed them.
In general, it looks pretty isolated to yaml work, so, except the additional trailing white space on the --yaml option, looks good and I think we can go with them. However, if possible, we should move the conditions added on reload handlers and ModelControllerImpl to the ConfigurationExtension.shouldProcessOperations.
Comment on lines
60
to
62
| default boolean hasStored() { | ||
| return false; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
isStored() looks like a more natural choice, but up to you
testsuite/test-runner/src/main/java/org/wildfly/core/testrunner/Server.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...test/manualmode/management/persistence/yaml/test-remove-attribute-removes-above-resource.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| config.remove(excluded); | ||
| boolean isPresent = config.containsKey(excluded); | ||
| Object value = config.remove(excluded); | ||
| if (value != null && value instanceof Map && DEPLOYMENT.equals(excluded)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minor: but value != null is not necessary here since it is protected by the instanceof operator
controller/src/main/java/org/jboss/as/controller/ModelControllerImpl.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ public class RunningModeControl { | |||
| private volatile boolean useCurrentConfig; | |||
| private volatile String newBootFileName; | |||
| private volatile Boolean suspend; | |||
| private volatile boolean applyConfigurationExtension; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
RunningModeControl has evolved keeping more stuff than only the required information to provide control over the server's current RunningMode. However, instead of adding information on whether the configuration extensions should be applied, wouldn't be easier if we just save here the value of extensibleConfigurationPersister.hasStored()?
With this information and the other field values we could derive in ConfigurationExtension.shouldProcessOperations() whether the yaml configuration should be applied again after a reload.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't really understand what you are proposing there :) The persister is not persisted between reloads
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ehsavoie I mean, move all the logic that calculates the applyConfigurationExtension from the reload handler to ConfigExtension.shouldProcessOperations() method and instead save in the RunningModeControl the flag that indicates the persistent storage has been stored. e.g extensibleConfigurationPersister.hasStored() value.
With the RunningModeControl class field values you should be able to calculate on ConfigExtension.shouldProcessOperations() whether the YAML operations should be loaded again.
Understanding the logic and purpose of applyConfigurationExtension calculation by looking at the handlers is a bit unclear, if you prefer to keep what you currently have, at least write a java doc explaining the applyConfigurationExtension purpose and meaning on RunningModeControl accessors.
Out of curiosity, I am not sure how the stored method is invoked even when we are using a read-only configuration file policy, but, if the user writes something after reloading, all the configuration, including those derived from the YAML files, will be available from the persistent storage? I understand that's the reason why you don't want to apply the YAML config again to do not overwrite any modification done after the previous reloading
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When we are in read-only mode the changes are persisted to the standalone-boot.xml so that when you reload you keep them. That's when the store method is invoked.
When you start or restart the standalone-boot.xml is overwritten by the standalone.xml.
|
@bstansberry @yersan I've rebased on #5934 so only the feature part where unmanaged deployments are supported is here now. |
|
@bstansberry I removed the feature label due to the https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFCORE-6503 comments. That probably was a mistake since you added them after the Jira discussions. Just to be clear, do you want to treat this as a pure feature request instead of an enhancement that adds more value to a released feature request? |
|
Core -> Full Integration Build 13686 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of d1d9329 Failed tests |
|
Core -> Full Integration Build 13700 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of d1d9329 Failed tests |
|
/retest |
* checking that the YAML deployment is unmanaged. * adding the unmanaged deployment to the list of operations * adding some light testing on this Jira: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFCORE-6503 Proposal: wildfly/wildfly-proposals#554 Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Hugonnet <ehugonne@redhat.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Jira: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFCORE-6503
Proposal: wildfly/wildfly-proposals#554