Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
fix self-update frequency to spread over 24 hrs for regular type and 4 hrs for hotfix #2948
fix self-update frequency to spread over 24 hrs for regular type and 4 hrs for hotfix #2948
Changes from 1 commit
325bdd9
1e3bfdf
d500f65
af04f93
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do we need the warning at line 308?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if some reason requested version is empty or missing in the goal state. we still want to update with old logic
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i don't think that is the case, since the check is on the boolean flag, and if the boolean is true, the version cannot be missing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Boolean flag is local to agent. If we enable the GA versioning but the version property is empty in GS for whatever reason (may be issue in CRP), in that case, we log the warning and continue with self-update.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think that behavior is correct. If CRP is indicating that the machine is enrolled to RSM updates, we should never fallback to self updates (unless the CRP flag changes, of course).
If the flag is True and the version is missing, then, as you point out, it may be an issue on CRP. We should then report this error and skip the update.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Initially this flag is not there when we implemented. That time we decided to do like this because things are in flux and if issue in crp and fix takes days to reach prod, till then we don't do the update. That's not good for customer without update so we want to continue with self-update and report status with this msg as RSM update has error.
After all that discussion today we think we shouldn't update sure I'll change it. But do you think is this issue in current release?
I'll consider changing as part of RSM stuff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please remove the code and add it when it is needed, or comment it out or mark it somehow. Otherwise this may be missed in a future review. Marking it facilitates reviews.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
added comment to revisit this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
try block is gone
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That was added because I need finally block before. Now I put that finallly logic when check the times, So I don't need finally, so I removed try too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
so what does that comment mean? can you clarify it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I should remove this msg
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The message is misleading, since it is logged for self-update too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree. As part of IsVersionFromRSM PR, I improved this msg to include update mode. But that PR is in hold since we were having discussion with Kashif/Srinath
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please improve this message for this release and you can adjust it later once the RSM stuff is ready