Bug 1386650 - [RFE] engine-setup uses previous host/port of remote DB as predefined values in the next usage
Summary: [RFE] engine-setup uses previous host/port of remote DB as predefined values ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED
Alias: None
Product: ovirt-engine
Classification: oVirt
Component: Setup.Engine
Version: 4.0.5
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified vote
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Sandro Bonazzola
QA Contact: Pavel Stehlik
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-10-19 11:44 UTC by Lucie Leistnerova
Modified: 2017-05-11 09:27 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-03-12 19:09:47 UTC
oVirt Team: Integration
ylavi: ovirt-future?
rule-engine: planning_ack?
rule-engine: devel_ack?
rule-engine: testing_ack?

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description Lucie Leistnerova 2016-10-19 11:44:29 UTC 
Description of problem:
I have both engine and dwh databases on the same remote server. Now I have to fill in host and port twice. engine-setup could use as predefined values of host/port the values that were filled in previously.

for example

          DWH database host [localhost]: 127.0.0.1
          DWH database port [5432]: 5433
...
          Engine database host [127.0.0.1]:
          Engine database port [5433]:
Comment 1 Yedidyah Bar David 2016-11-23 08:24:43 UTC 
(In reply to Lucie Leistnerova from comment #0)
> Description of problem:
> I have both engine and dwh databases on the same remote server. Now I have
> to fill in host and port twice. engine-setup could use as predefined values
> of host/port the values that were filled in previously.
> 
> for example
> 
>           DWH database host [localhost]: 127.0.0.1
>           DWH database port [5432]: 5433
> ...
>           Engine database host [127.0.0.1]:
>           Engine database port [5433]:

I think the case of having the two DBs on different remote machines is also quite likely.
Comment 2 Yaniv Kaul 2017-03-12 19:09:47 UTC 
Looks reasonable to me, not worth the effort to change at the moment.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.