Sebastien,
Yes, I am ok with it and finished implementing it all (including the
behavior for unchanged settings) and planning on creating a PR still
today on this.
-Daniel
On Thu, 2016-08-11 at 10:16 +0200, Sebastien Han wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> Are you fine with my answer?
> Just trying to keep the main subject alive here :).
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Shinobu Kinjo <shinobu.kj@xxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
> > Daniel,
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Daniel Oliveira <
> > doliveira@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Shinobu,
> > >
> > > Sorry, but I am not sure I understand what your request is. If it
> > > is
> > > not related to Sebastien's feature request, we probably would
> > > need a
> > > different one so we can track it properly. Are you referring to a
> > > *config file parser* kind of thing, where some checking is done
> > > to make
> > > sure settings are in the proper section? Or am I missing
> > > something?
> >
> > Yes, that is exactly what I said.
> > Does that capabilities make sense?
> >
> > >
> > > -Daniel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 19:51 +0900, Shinobu Kinjo wrote:
> > > > Just question.
> > > >
> > > > Do we have already something like config file validation check
> > > > command?
> > > > If not, it would be better to add this capability for end users
> > > > if it
> > > > would not burden you.
> > > >
> > > > Because it's not a bit clear about which option must be in
> > > > which
> > > > section.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > - Shinobu
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Sebastien Han <shan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Thanks a lot Daniel, that looks exactly right.
> > > > > If nothing changed I think it's valid to keep both fields
> > > > > showing
> > > > > the
> > > > > same value.
> > > > > This is either when comparing with whatever tool because the
> > > > > structure
> > > > > won't change so we don't have to handle a particular case.
> > > > >
> > > > > Others? Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Daniel Oliveira <
> > > > > doliveira@xxxxxxxx
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Sebastien,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For now, We have something like this (which follows the
> > > > > > same
> > > > > > standard
> > > > > > as 'config diff' and 'config get' :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > #1:
> > > > > > ./ceph --admin-daemon out/osd.1.asok config diff get
> > > > > > mon_data_avail_crit
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > "diff": {
> > > > > > "current": {
> > > > > > "mon_data_avail_crit": "1"
> > > > > > },
> > > > > > "defaults": {
> > > > > > "mon_data_avail_crit": "5"
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > },
> > > > > > "unknown": []
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ./ceph --admin-daemon out/osd.1.asok config diff get
> > > > > > mon_data_avail_warn
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > "diff": {
> > > > > > "current": {
> > > > > > "mon_data_avail_warn": "10"
> > > > > > },
> > > > > > "defaults": {
> > > > > > "mon_data_avail_warn": "30"
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > },
> > > > > > "unknown": []
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What would be the proper way to display a setting that *was
> > > > > > not*
> > > > > > changed from its default?, for example:
> > > > > > ./ceph --admin-daemon out/osd.1.asok config diff get
> > > > > > num_client
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > "diff": {
> > > > > > "current": {},
> > > > > > "defaults": {}
> > > > > > },
> > > > > > "unknown": []
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Or only the "current" value?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > -Daniel
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 15:32 -0600, Daniel Oliveira wrote:
> > > > > > > Sebastien,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As I was working on a couple of other things related to
> > > > > > > validating
> > > > > > > parameters/settings, I ended up adding the feature in
> > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > and I
> > > > > > > am just in the process of testing it. I will keep you
> > > > > > > posted.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > -Daniel
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 14:16 +0200, Sebastien Han wrote:
> > > > > > > > Would be nice if you could get a stab at it, actually I
> > > > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > where to look in the code to see where the magic is
> > > > > > > > happening
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > admin socket.
> > > > > > > > Most of the logic is there so this shouldn't be too
> > > > > > > > difficult
> > > > > > > > :).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this Jesse?
> > > > > > > > Thanks for offering your help on this one!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Jesse Williamson <
> > > > > > > > jwilliamson@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Sebastien Han wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi Sebastien,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'd like to have the same but for a specific option
> > > > > > > > > > only.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So something like:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ceph daemon mon.ceph-mon-01 config diff get <field>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Which will return the diff between the actual
> > > > > > > > > > config
> > > > > > > > > > value and
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > original config value.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I might be able to help with this, if there's no
> > > > > > > > > support
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > anyone already
> > > > > > > > > knows of, or clear takers. I'm working on a small
> > > > > > > > > config
> > > > > > > > > -related
> > > > > > > > > librados
> > > > > > > > > feature right now and am somewhat familiar with the
> > > > > > > > > relevant
> > > > > > > > > moving parts on
> > > > > > > > > that end, so I might be in a good position to work on
> > > > > > > > > it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > WRT the admin socket, I'm less clear, but can be
> > > > > > > > > pointed in
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > right
> > > > > > > > > direction. :-)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -Jesse
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > > ––––––
> > > > > Sébastien Han
> > > > > Principal Storage Architect
> > > > >
> > > > > "Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood."
> > > > >
> > > > > Mail: seb@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Address: 11 bis, rue Roquépine - 75008 Paris
> > > > > --
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> > > > > ceph
> > > > > -devel" in
> > > > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > More majordomo info at
> > > > > http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph
> > > -devel" in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > More majordomo info at
> > > http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Email:
> > shinobu@xxxxxxxxx
> > shinobu@xxxxxxxxxx
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph
> > -devel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
