Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 1373953

Summary: [QE](6.4.z) max-saved-replicated-journal-size = 0 should preserve no old journals
Product: [JBoss] JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 Reporter: Erich Duda <eduda>
Component: HornetQAssignee: Peter Palaga <ppalaga>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Peter Mackay <pmackay>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 6.4.10CC: bmaxwell, csuconic, eduda, lakagwu, msvehla, pmackay, ppalaga, rstancel, tom.ross, toross
Target Milestone: CR1   
Target Release: EAP 6.4.16   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-06-22 09:19:46 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:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1434495, 1438037    

Description Erich Duda 2016-09-07 14:09:48 UTC 
Description of problem:
Behavior of max-saved-replicated-journal-size = 0 is not intuitive. It preserves infinite number of old replicas but it should preserves 0 old replicas.


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Configure replicated HA topology with max-saved-replicated-journal-size = 0.
2. Do several failovers/failbacks.
3. Check whether the number of old replicas is 0 on backup node.
Comment 1 Erich Duda 2016-09-07 14:15:52 UTC 
See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1348322
Comment 2 Clebert Suconic 2016-09-07 14:42:36 UTC 
The intention was that you should have at least 1 folder up. Otherwise the ID for the old folder would always be 1.
Comment 3 Clebert Suconic 2016-09-07 18:54:22 UTC 
I have added this into upstream:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/758


it's an easy change. I will wait for further instructions on where and when to back port it.
Comment 4 Clebert Suconic 2016-09-08 16:30:23 UTC 
when/where to back-port this?

Do I have permissions?
Comment 5 Erich Duda 2016-09-09 05:39:46 UTC 
The fix should go to the next CP release. So just add the commit to 6.4.z maintenance branch.
Comment 7 Peter Palaga 2016-09-12 12:43:50 UTC 
(In reply to Erich Duda from comment #5)
> The fix should go to the next CP release. So just add the commit to 6.4.z
> maintenance branch.

This is something Brad will decide.

Clebert, please hold on with backporting to your 6.4.z maintenance branch till the present BZ gets assigned to some specific CP.
Comment 21 Peter Palaga 2017-05-17 15:00:24 UTC 
PR sent https://github.com/hornetq/hornetq/pull/2115
Comment 22 Peter Mackay 2017-06-14 09:52:54 UTC 
Verified with EAP 6.4.16.CP.CR1
Comment 23 Petr Penicka 2017-06-22 09:19:46 UTC 
Released on June 20 2017 as part of the EAP 6.4.16 maintenance release.