Humans make mistakes. That’s because they learn and by making mistakes and experimenting they perfect their skills. Computers on the other hand only do as they are told. When a human interacts with the computer, she expects the computer to be human-like to the extent that it can recover or react to the mistakes she makes while learning the rules of interaction with it.
In case of RHQ one of the users is a plugin developer. An RHQ (agent) plugin is a “thing” that talks to some other software and can configure and monitor it. The other type of the RHQ user is the system administrator that uses RHQ and its plugins to manage their IT infrastructure. For the administrator, the plugin becomes part of the “computer”. But the plugin is made by humans and humans make mistakes.
One of the mistakes the plugin developer can make is to assign a wrong “resource key” during the discovery of resources. A resource key is something that uniquely identifies the particular “resource” the plugin can talk to. You can dive much deeper into the details of this here but in a nutshell, the resource key is extracted from the data the plugin can gather about a resource in such a way that if at some later point in time the plugin is told to rediscover the resources it can manage, the resource key will remain the same for the same resources. Usually, the resource key is a file-system location of some significant configuration file, an installation directory, a port a service is listening on, a CPU id, a mount point, etc. Whatever fits the need of the particular plugin.
If the plugin developer realized she made a mistake in the way the resource key is generated and that it for example doesn’t identify the resource in a completely unique way, the only thing she could do is to create a new version of the plugin with the fix and distribute it to her customers. Easy.
But the consequences for the customers (i.e. the system administrators) were quite severe. Because the resource key algorithm changed, the resources that they already had in their inventories and that they managed, collected stats on, had alerts defined for, etc. suddenly became defunct and a new resource (or even more resources, with the new resource keys) appeared in their place. The administrator would then have to go and define their alerts, add the new resource(s) to the groups they defined for them, etc. all over again. Not to mention the fact the historical data would from now on be split between the “old” and “new” resource so if the admin wanted to retain the historical data they could not just delete the defunct resource. They’d have to keep it in their inventory in which the resource would forever stay in unavailable state showing red icons signifying a problem where there wouldn’t be any (well, the problem was on the plugin developer side, but the admin would suffer for it).
But all that changed. Yesterday, I merged in a new feature that enables the plugin developers to fix their past mistakes in a way that the system admins wouldn’t be punished for.
I called the process “resource upgrade” because it enables the plugin developers to change the data of the existing resources to “upgrade” them so that they conform to the latest version of the plugin code. For now the feature is quite rudimentary and only enables to upgrade the resource key, resource name and description. Obviously, the other big candidates for upgrade would be the plugin configuration (aka connection settings) and resource configuration. When we were thinking about this though we realized that not only would implmenenting the configuration upgrades be quite complex because we would basically have to break the fundamental principle of RHQ configuration which is that the RHQ server is the authoritative source of configuration data, but we couldn’t find a plugin that would benefit from such capability.
If you happen to have a custom RHQ plugin for your piece of software and say to yourself, damn, why oh why didn’t they think about my use case, I’d love to be able to upgrade the configuration of existing resources, please leave a comment here. I’d love to hear about your needs so that we can think about supporting them in the future.
When I said that the resource upgrade supports upgrading the resource name and description I partially lied though. The actual update of these is guarded by a server configuration setting because both resource name and description can be updated by the users and we wouldn’t want to overwrite their updates without consent. For now there is even no way to enable that setting in the UI even though it’d be trivial to add. The problem with this is that for this feature to be useful to our current community and customers, we’d have to update all the plugins with code that would implement it which becomes a substantial amount of work with our 30+ plugins at the moment. But if you feel like you absolutely need this, contact our team. Anything is possible when there’s enough backing 😉
You can read more about the technicalities of the implementation on our wiki.