Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[v6r12] Av140512-v6r12: to deal with Disk/Tape separation #1950

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 13, 2014

Conversation

avedaee
Copy link
Contributor

@avedaee avedaee commented May 21, 2014

Ref. on JIRA: https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/LHCBDIRAC-261?filter=-1

In order to deal with the Disk/Tape separation I made a small change in
DowntimeCommand, ResourceManagementClient and ResourceManagementDB

2 more remarks:

  1. we need an additional field "gocdbServiceType" in the DowntimeCache table inside the corresponding RM DB to store 2 service types ("srm" or "srm.nearline")
  2. DowntimeCommand is using a getStorageElementOptions method in DIRAC.ConfigurationSystem.Client.Helpers.Resources and this might be changed soon

@fstagni
Copy link
Contributor

fstagni commented Jun 2, 2014

From a pure code point of view this seems ok, now my question is: is the GOCDBClient instructed to get the service type every time, and store it in the cache? I don't see any change for this part.

As a note to Andrei: merging this PR in integration might not be straightforward, especially considering the fact that it uses the Resources handler.

@fstagni
Copy link
Contributor

fstagni commented Jun 3, 2014

It should be ok, I would say go on and merge

atsareg pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 13, 2014
[v6r12] Av140512-v6r12: to deal with Disk/Tape separation
@atsareg atsareg merged commit 9548f3b into DIRACGrid:rel-v6r12 Jun 13, 2014
@atsareg
Copy link
Contributor

atsareg commented Jun 13, 2014

The request is badly done because of mixing massive beautification and actual changes - difficult to review and likely to create multiple conflicts

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants