Bug 801504
Summary: | Using an Availability condition on a recovery Alert doesn't trigger Alert or Recovery | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Other] RHQ Project | Reporter: | Charles Crouch <ccrouch> |
Component: | Alerts | Assignee: | RHQ Project Maintainer <rhq-maint> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Mike Foley <mfoley> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | high | ||
Version: | 4.2 | CC: | dsteigne, hbrock, hrupp, jshaughn, loleary |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | RHQ 4.4.0 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | 787227 | Environment: | |
Last Closed: | 2012-11-16 03:25:28 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 787227 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 782579 |
Description
Charles Crouch
2012-03-08 17:27:00 UTC
Having briefly discussed with jshaughn we couldn't quickly come up with a reason why this shouldn't work, given Debbie's last comment. We should try to repro this with the latest avail changes. (11:30:12 AM) jshaughn: ccrouch: note that this sort of thing was verified for the 241 release: see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644048#c6 I've tested a recovery alert that uses a "Goes UP" condition to re-enable another alert definition, a "Goes DOWN" alert. I set the "Goes DOWN" def to disable after firing and then waited for the Goes UP def to fire and re-enable it. This worked as expected. I did not use the exact reproduction steps above because I think it may be these steps that are flawed and producing the misleading results. I think ccrouch's question/scenario above is exactly what is happening and the test needs to be re-done. For an EAP that is UP a restart operation likely will not report any change in availability, and if it did it would be a change to DOWN. It happens too fast to report a change to DOWN, and then a change to UP, our avail checking is not that granular. The test above would work only if the EAP server was DOWN when the restart operation took place. If you really want to keep the spirit of the above test, try the following using 3 alert def. OOM Def -> fire a shutdown operation -> disable after firing Goes DOWN Def -> fire a start operation Goes UP Def -> Recovery for OOM Def Then, with the EAP up ensure the OOM alert def fires. |