Open Stack

On 06/27/2013 07:05 PM, John Garbutt wrote:
> I haven't seen any plans to change this.
>
> The way I see it, the states make most sense for resize, which is the
> end-user facing operation.
>
> Personally I see migrate as a more admin focused operation.
> So to help simplify the code, I am OK with slightly confusing states
> for those users.
> The exception, I guess, is when users want to "re-balance" their
> servers between availability zones.
>
> With any luck, post refactor, it should be easier to re-visit this,
> and perhaps add those extra states.
>
> John
>
> On 27 June 2013 09:14, guohliu <guohliu at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I apologize if this question was already covered and I missed it, as we know
>> the migrate and resize share the same code path as well as instance status,
>> notification message etc in current code base, somehow it might confuse the
>> user when he/she perform migrate but get VERIFY_RESIZE status, and as far as
>> I know this wasn't to be targeted in migrate refactor work, I just wondering
>> to know do you think this is a issue? how about to separate migrate and
>> resize with different instance status and notification message as well as
>> task status? any comments would be appreciated.
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Guohliu
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
Hi John,

Thanks for your comments, it makes sense to me, the resize is all good, 
we might just need to slightly separate migrate status based on resize 
code logic, but one exception is we might need to add confirm migrate 
and revert migrate in admin action. thoughts?

Regards
Guohliu