-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 235
[cuebot][FIX] Hardware tags update on Host restart #2125
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[cuebot][FIX] Hardware tags update on Host restart #2125
Conversation
DiegoTavares
left a comment
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.
Looking back at the history of HostTagType.HARDWARE it was added to the original cue3 project 17 years ago and has never been used. I think it is safe to repurpose for marking tags that have been added by rqd at boot time.
One side effect of this PR in its current state is that hosts existing prior to its deployment might have duplicate tags, as updateTagsByType only purges tags by type and new HARDWARE tags might already exist as MANUAL. This can be mitigated by also removing tags by name using HostDao's method void removeTag(HostInterface host, String tag);
|
Addressed. Also added a test to cover that case. |
Problem
When an RQD instance restarts with a different version, the version tag (
rqdv-X) in CueCommander is not being updated. The tags remain stuck at the first registered version despite the RQD instance reporting the correct new version on startup.Root Cause
There is no mechanism to update host tags when an existing RQD instance reconnects with different version information. Tags are only set during initial host creation and remain static afterwards.
Solution
updateHostTagsmethod to handle tag updates on host reconnectionHostTagType.HARDWAREfor RQD tags to distinguish them from user-added manual tagsNote: HostTagType.HARDWARE seemed unused. I don't know if a different usage was planned for it. It seems a good contender to segregate easily tags added at creation from manual tags added by the user later.
Testing
Update related unit tests to reflect the new tag ordering after the type classification change.
Add coverage to ensure manual tags are left untouched.