On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Roman Vasilets <rvasilets at mirantis.com> wrote: > Hi, > Could you provide the link to this code? > Here it is: https://github.com/openstack/ceilometer/blob/master/ceilometer/profiler/notifications.py#L76 > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Pradeep Kilambi <pkilambi at redhat.com> > wrote: > >> We're in the process of converting existing meters to use a more >> declarative approach where we add the meter definition as part of a yaml. >> As part of this transition there are few notification handlers where the id >> is not consistent. For example, in profiler notification Handler the >> resource_id is set to "profiler-%s" % message["payload"]["base_id"] . Is >> there a reason we have the prefix? Can we ignore this and directly set >> to message["payload"]["base_id"] ? Seems like there is no real need for the >> prefix here unless i'm missing something. Can we go ahead and drop this? >> >> If we don't hear anything i'll assume there is no objection to dropping >> this prefix. >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- >> -- >> Pradeep Kilambi; irc: prad >> OpenStack Engineering >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- -- Pradeep Kilambi; irc: prad OpenStack Engineering -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150813/5bbf3b4d/attachment.html>