Open Stack

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Michael Basnight <mbasnight at gmail.com>wrote:

>
> On Oct 21, 2013, at 1:40 PM, Tim Simpson wrote:
>
> >>> 2. I also think a datastore_version alone should be sufficient since
> the associated datastore type will be implied:
> >
> >> When i brought this up it was generally discussed as being confusing.
> Id like to use type and rely on having a default (or active) version behind
> the scenes.
> >
> > Can't we do both? If a user wants a specific version, most likely they
> had to enumerate all datastore_versions, spot it in a list, and grab the
> guid. Why force them to also specify the datastore_type when we can easily
> determine what that is?
>
> Fair enough.
>
>
It's not intuitive to the User, if they are specifying a version alone.
 You don't boot a 'version' of something, with specifying what that some
thing is.  I would rather they only specified the datastore_type alone, and
not have them specify a version at all.


> >
> >>> 4. Additionally, in the current pull request to implement this it is
> possible to avoid passing a version, but only if no more than one version
> of the datastore_type exists in the database.
> >>>
> >>> I think instead the datastore_type row in the database should also
> have a "default_version_id" property, that an operator could update to the
> most recent version or whatever other criteria they wish to use, meaning
> the call could become this simple:
> >
> >> Since we have determined from this email thread that we have an active
> status, and that > 1 version can be active, we have to think about the
> precedence of active vs default. My question would be, if we have a
> default_version_id and a active version, what do we choose on behalf of the
> user? If there is > 1 active version and a user does not specify the
> version, the api will error out, unless a default is defined. We also need
> a default_type in the config so the existing APIs can maintain
> compatibility. We can re-discuss this for v2 of the API.
> >
> > Imagine that an operator sets up Trove and only has one active version.
> They then somehow fumble setting up the default_version, but think they
> succeeded as the API works for users the way they expect anyway. Then they
> go to add another active version and suddenly their users get error
> messages.
> >
> > If we only use the "default_version" field of the datastore_type to
> define a default would honor the principle of least surprise.
>
> Are you saying you must have a default version defined to have > 1 active
> versions?
>
>
I think it makes sense to have a 'Active' flag on every version -- and a
default flag for the version that should be used as a default in the event
the user doesn't specify.  It also makes sense to require the deployer to
set this accurately, and if one doesn't exist instance provisioning errors
out.


> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131021/facb3c15/attachment.html>