Description of problem: Request capability of using AND & OR in Dynagroups expression language Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
Correction, make that NOT and OR in Dynagroups expression. (In reply to comment #0) > Description of problem: > Request capability of using AND & OR in Dynagroups expression language > > Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): > > > How reproducible: > > > Steps to Reproduce: > 1. > 2. > 3. > > Actual results: > > > Expected results: > > > Additional info:
Temporarily adding the keyword "SubBug" so we can be sure we have accounted for all the bugs. keyword: new = Tracking + FutureFeature + SubBug
making sure we're not missing any bugs in rhq_triage
The need for this maybe reduced if Bug 832398 is implemented. If 832398 was supported then one could great a handcrafted group containing just the resources you wanted (instead of OR'ing together a bunch of platform names) then you could use this group as the root for another dynagroup. Not a perfect match, but may be sufficient.
The 'memberof' expression may be sufficient. closing on assumption that this is sufficient.
I'm wondering if we can re-open this feature request. I'm not sure that 'memberof' is sufficient for the use case of filtering out members of another ('parent') dynagroup; in short, the need for a NOT operator. I've got a dynagroup that looks like this: resource.type.plugin = JBossAS7 resource.version.contains = 6.4 resource.type.category = SERVER resource.parent.type.category = PLATFORM groupby resource.pluginConfiguration[productType] It works, it includes all the JBoss 6.4.x servers, but it also includes the JBoss 6.4.8 servers that are part of JON 3.3 -- which we won't want as part of the group. Not sure how I can do that using 'memberof', without the NOT operator. Adding a tag to the parent platform (as suggested here https://access.redhat.com/solutions/25394) is not an option in this case. There could be hundreds of inventoried JBoss 6.4 servers, but just 1 or 2 JON servers (with their JBoss 6.4.8). It would be easier to just weed out the 1 or 2 (if ha) JON servers by a NOT operator than to rewrite the parent platform name of potentially hundreds of JBoss 6.4 servers.