You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 13, 2018. It is now read-only.
Currently, Traffic Ops volume.config (and storage.config volume number) is created from parameters, Disk_Volume, RAM_Volume, and SSD_Volume.
There's no reason to calculate volume numbers from user input. They can be calculated from the Drive_Prefix parameters. For example, Drive_Prefix only gets volume 1. If Drive_Prefix and SSD_Drive_Prefix exist, Disks get volume 1 and SSDs get volume 2.
This should be a relatively small and safe change. The logic that needs changed/added is in traffic_ops/app/lib/UI/ConfigFiles.pm sub volume_dot_config and storage_dot_config (and a comment in hosting_dot_config).
Putting this in the 1.8 milestone because it isn't critically important, and it can wait for 2.0 if 2.0 is out soonish. But if it's a long time to get out, we should go ahead and do this in 1.x, because it's not big and makes one less thing to go wrong in production.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently, Traffic Ops volume.config (and storage.config volume number) is created from parameters,
Disk_Volume
,RAM_Volume
, andSSD_Volume
.There's no reason to calculate volume numbers from user input. They can be calculated from the
Drive_Prefix
parameters. For example,Drive_Prefix
only gets volume 1. IfDrive_Prefix
andSSD_Drive_Prefix
exist, Disks get volume 1 and SSDs get volume 2.This should be a relatively small and safe change. The logic that needs changed/added is in
traffic_ops/app/lib/UI/ConfigFiles.pm
subvolume_dot_config
andstorage_dot_config
(and a comment inhosting_dot_config
).Putting this in the 1.8 milestone because it isn't critically important, and it can wait for 2.0 if 2.0 is out soonish. But if it's a long time to get out, we should go ahead and do this in 1.x, because it's not big and makes one less thing to go wrong in production.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: