
| Key: |
RHQ-375
|
| Type: |
Improvement
|
| Status: |
Accepted
|
| Priority: |
Minor
|
| Assignee: |
Unassigned
|
| Reporter: |
Jay Shaughnessy
|
| Votes: |
0
|
| Watchers: |
0
|
|
If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
|
|
|
|
If I create a compatible group of resources I can then manipulate group members in various ways because they have the same resource type. As an example, performing a plugin config update for a group of JBAS servers, setting the shutdown method.
If I attempt to do this when one or more of the resources is unavailable it will almost certainly fail. The failure generates a massive stack trace, displayed in the update detail for the failure, that I think boils down to the resource being unavailable (is this is specific to JBAS servers?). Also, it can cause a long "in-progress" state for the update.
Perhaps the user should be warned before, or prevented from, performing certain manipulations on groups with mixed availability.
|
|
Description
|
If I create a compatible group of resources I can then manipulate group members in various ways because they have the same resource type. As an example, performing a plugin config update for a group of JBAS servers, setting the shutdown method.
If I attempt to do this when one or more of the resources is unavailable it will almost certainly fail. The failure generates a massive stack trace, displayed in the update detail for the failure, that I think boils down to the resource being unavailable (is this is specific to JBAS servers?). Also, it can cause a long "in-progress" state for the update.
Perhaps the user should be warned before, or prevented from, performing certain manipulations on groups with mixed availability. |
Show » |
| There are no comments yet on this issue.
|
|