Open Stack

On 13/11/13 23:02, Steve Baker wrote:
> On 11/12/2013 07:40 PM, Mitsuru Kanabuchi wrote:
>> Hello Heat folks.
>>
>> Thank you very much for a lot of discussion about API-retry-with-idempotency
>> at Hong Kong summit.
>>
>> I wrote discussion's points to summit etherpad.
>> Sorry for the delay.
>>
>>    https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-summit-heat-convergence
>>
>> Please comment me if I'm misunderstanding.
>>
>> I will also update the detail of API-retry-with-idempotency here.
>>
>>    https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kgpc00uuQr
>>
>> I will email after it updated.
>>
>>
> Just to confirm, my understanding of the outcome of that session was
> that pythonclients should implement retries of failed requests with the
> idempotency token.
>
> Which means that no changes are required in heat, since the clients are
> attempting the retries inside a single client call.

Assuming this can still fail eventually (even after retries) we still 
need a way in Heat to make sure we can delete the resource by looking it 
up from the idempotency token.

Of course the idempotency token *should* be just the name, but since 
most projects have inexplicably chosen not to enforce unique names (in 
tenant scope), we're in the odd position of requiring 3 ways to look up 
any resource (by name, UUID, and idempotency token). That's bonkers, but 
what can you do?

cheers,
Zane.