Open Stack

On Mon, Apr 14 2014, ZhiQiang Fan wrote:

> Hi, developers,
>
> For fixing bug https://launchpad.net/bugs/1304886, I uploaded a patch
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/86501/, when review this patch, there are
> two different kinds of opinions, I don't know which is the better choice,
> so I ask for help here.
>
> The patch aims at disallow user specify duplicate alarm ids in combination
> rule to reduce unnecessary alarm evaluate. We can avoid such input in two
> ways:
>
> * reject user's request with 400, so force user to provide unique list
> * accept such request but remove duplicate ids for the user
>
> the problem is that
> * the server side actually has no error, it just considers the efficiency
> problem (and the efficiency improvement is tiny), so reject the request
> seems a bit rude
> * the user provide a bad request but we accept, which will cause the user
> think he is doing a right thing, although he can check the return result
> and find something different, but from my experience, I usually only check
> response status code, and will not check each attribute carefully.
>
> here is an existent example of accept such problematical request which
> provided by Ildiko Vancsa:
> https://github.com/openstack/ceilometer/blob/master/ceilometer/api/controllers/v2.py#L904
> or search 'def statistic' in that file if LOC is changed
>
> can you provide your opinion, or directly review that patch please?

"Be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from
others"

So I would tend to convert the list to a set and not raise any error. If
the user wants to have extra verification, it can compare what it sent
to what it got in response.

-- 
Julien Danjou
;; Free Software hacker
;; http://julien.danjou.info
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140414/1d156530/attachment.pgp>