Forum Discussion

Steven_Le_Roux_'s avatar
Steven_Le_Roux_
Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
Mar 28, 2012

Transaction issue w/ iControl v11

Hi,

 

 

I run into an issue while I'm trying two things in one transaction :

 

- set the template property for a given monitor

 

- assign a monitor on a pool created in the same transaction

 

 

 

 

 

Here is the process I would like to have :

 

 

 

1 - Start a transaction

 

2 - create a pool

 

3 - create a monitor template

 

4 - adjust the monitor template (recv and send strings)

 

5 - assign the created monitor to the created pool

 

6 - create a virtual address

 

7 - create a virtual server containing the created pool

 

8 - set snat automap to the created vs

 

9 - set vlan to the created vs

 

10 - submit the transaction

 

 

 

 

 

This issue is I have to run steps 4 and 5 out of the transaction so I have :

 

 

 

1 - Start a transaction

 

2 - create a pool

 

3 - create a monitor template

 

6 - create a virtual address

 

7 - create a virtual server containing the created pool

 

8 - set snat automap to the created vs

 

9 - set vlan to the created vs

 

10 - submit the transaction

 

 

4 - adjust the monitor template (recv and send strings)

 

5 - assign the created monitor to the created pool

 

 

 

 

If I don't invoke a transaction, this works w/o any problem, so I guess the transaction process, for these two methods, parse the saved configuration w/o taking care of the pending configurations.

 

 

 

Could you confirm the issue ? Do you have plan to include this in a single transaction ?

 

 

 

(I can provide some code implementation if needed)

 

 

 

Thx

 

dev
devops
iControl
  • hooleylist's avatar
    hooleylist
    Icon for Cirrostratus rankCirrostratus
    Mar 28, 2012
    Hi Steven,

     

     

    In addition to posting here, I suggest opening a case with F5 Support to request this enhancement to transactions. I am not sure what you're seeing is expected. Maybe Joe can comment on that. But for the RFE, a support case will be the best option.

     

     

    Aaron
  • Joe_Pruitt's avatar
    Joe_Pruitt
    Mar 28, 2012
    Yes, this is a known issue with transactions. In fact, we talked about it on the recent iControl Guru webcast we did.

     

     

    The issue is due to the fact that some of the methods (such as the monitor methods) rely on the underlying objects to be created for internal validation to occur. In a transaction, when the calls are made, validation happens but the objects are not actually created until the commit happens. But, for the methods that have validation that looks for certain objects to physically exist, they will fail.

     

     

    Again, this is a known issue and it is only present on a few methods, which you've found some of them.

     

     

    First of all, I'd submit a support request to get it fixed.

     

     

    Second, as a workaround for now, the best solution is to break your code up into 2 transactions where the monitors are created in a second transaction after the first completes.

     

     

    -Joe

     

  • Steven_Le_Roux_'s avatar
    Steven_Le_Roux_
    Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
    Mar 30, 2012
    Posted By Joe on 03/28/2012 08:35 AM

     

    Yes, this is a known issue with transactions. In fact, we talked about it on the recent iControl Guru webcast we did.

     

     

    Yes it was me who asked for this issue :)

     

     

     

    The issue is due to the fact that some of the methods (such as the monitor methods) rely on the underlying objects to be created for internal validation to occur. In a transaction, when the calls are made, validation happens but the objects are not actually created until the commit happens. But, for the methods that have validation that looks for certain objects to physically exist, they will fail.

     

     

    Again, this is a known issue and it is only present on a few methods, which you've found some of them.

     

     

    First of all, I'd submit a support request to get it fixed.

     

     

    Second, as a workaround for now, the best solution is to break your code up into 2 transactions where the monitors are created in a second transaction after the first completes.

     

     

    -Joe

     

     

     

    that's what I did until there is a proper solution.