Bug 983980
Summary: | EAP6 CLI command should not allow same runtime-name to be used at another deploy | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [JBoss] JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 | Reporter: | Jay SenSharma <jsenshar> |
Component: | Domain Management | Assignee: | Emmanuel Hugonnet (ehsavoie) <ehugonne> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Petr Kremensky <pkremens> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 6.0.1 | CC: | brian.stansberry, dereed, ehugonne, emuckenh, lcosti, olubyans, pkremens, sjadhav |
Target Milestone: | ER1 | ||
Target Release: | EAP 6.2.0 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: |
Two deployments with the same runtime name would incorrectly be allowed to be deployed onto the same JBoss EAP 6 instance.
As a result, the instance may enter an inconsistent state in using the runtime name for the wrong deployment.
This issue has been fixed in this release of JBoss EAP 6, and a runtime name is now only allowed to be used once per JBoss EAP 6 instance. If an attempt is made to deploy an application with a runtime name already in use, the following error will be displayed:
----
There is already a deployment called ${name} with the same runtime name ${runtime-name} on server group ${server-group}
----
|
Story Points: | --- |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2013-12-15 16:14:45 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Jay SenSharma
2013-07-12 12:42:02 UTC
According to the Runtime-Name description : Name by which the deployment should be known within a server's runtime. This would be equivalent to the file name of a deployment file, and would form the basis for such things as default Java Enterprise Edition application and module names. This would typically be the same as 'name', but in some cases users may wish to have two deployments with the same 'runtime-name' (e.g. two versions of "foo.war") both available in the deployment content repository, in which case the deployments would need to have distinct 'name' values but would have the same 'runtime-name'. So it is not a bug, even if I don't see the use case behind it. [response to Emmanuel] Having two deployments with the same runtime-name in the domain content repository, so they can be deployed to different instances, is ok. Having two deployments with the same runtime name actually deployed to an instance is not (that's the issue here). A little more detail... The original issue was found in domain mode: <deployments> <deployment name="test.war.v1" runtime-name="test.war"> <content sha1="abc..."/> </deployment> <deployment name="test.war.v2" runtime-name="test.war"> <content sha1="def..."/> </deployment> </deployments> <server-groups> <server-group name="main-server-group" profile="full"> <deployments> <deployment name="test.war.v1" runtime-name="test.war"/> <deployment name="test.war.v2" runtime-name="test.war"/> </deployments> </server-group> </server-groups> The first <deployments> section is correct. In that section, only "name" must be unique. But the two entries in <server-group><deployments> is a bug, as runtime-name must be unique there. The test case listed in the original BZ description is the standalone equivalent of the above configuration, where runtime-name *must* be unique but is isn't being enforced. This should be fixed in the domain management, not cli. Emmanuel Hugonnet <ehugonne> made a comment on jira WFLY-1972 A little more detail... The original issue was found in domain mode: <deployments> <deployment name="test.war.v1" runtime-name="test.war"> <content sha1="abc..."/> </deployment> <deployment name="test.war.v2" runtime-name="test.war"> <content sha1="def..."/> </deployment> </deployments> <server-groups> <server-group name="main-server-group" profile="full"> <deployments> <deployment name="test.war.v1" runtime-name="test.war"/> <deployment name="test.war.v2" runtime-name="test.war"/> </deployments> </server-group> </server-groups> The first <deployments> section is correct. In that section, only "name" must be unique. But the two entries in <server-group><deployments> is a bug, as runtime-name must be unique there. The test case listed in the original BZ description is the standalone equivalent of the above configuration, where runtime-name *must* be unique but is isn't being enforced. Verified in EAP 6.2.0.ER2. EAP is now acting as described in comment 2 If user tries to deploy application with already used runtime name: "There is already a deployment called ${name} with the same runtime name ${runtime-name} on server group ${server-group}" message is shown. |