InventoryManager change?
John Mazzitelli
mazz at redhat.com
Tue Oct 19 15:56:28 UTC 2010
I captured this thread in bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644409
On 10/19/2010 10:02 AM, Adrian Brock wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On 19 October 2010 13:51, John Mazzitelli <mazz at redhat.com
> <mailto:mazz at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> This seems to make sense. However, I question blindly setting the status
> to COMMITTED. I'm thinking it might also be possible that the existing
> resource could be appropriately be in the NEW state - and in that case,
> setting it to COMMITTED here might be wrong.
>
>
> Looking at the parent status might be more accurate?
>
> That's just a theory - I can't say for sure if, at this point in the
> code, the resource could be in any other state other than COMMITTED. We
> may need to put some kind of conditional around this, say something
> like:
>
> if (existingResource.getInventoryStatus() == InventoryStatus.DELETED) {
> existingResource.setInventoryStatus(InventoryStatus.COMMITTED)
> }
>
> I'm assuming you stepped through this in a debugger - what state was the
> existingResource in at that point in this mergeResourceFromDiscovery
> method?
>
>
>
> It was DELETED. Which is what causes the problem.
> You remove a service then try to put it back, but it stays DELETED.
More information about the rhq-devel
mailing list