[openstack-dev] [Ironic] *ED states strike back

Ruby Loo rlooyahoo at gmail.com
Thu Feb 19 17:32:10 UTC 2015


I think that if there is a use case for an *ED state, then we should have
it. And if we have one *ED state, I think it makes sense (and is
consistent) to have them for all the active states.

If we have *ED states, I would prefer that we add them in when the active
state is added. So add <state>ING, <state>ED, <state>FAIL. If a particular
driver has nothing it wants to do in an *ED state, it can cause a
transition from the *ED state to the passive/stable state.

I don't want the *ED states to be optional because that puts the onus on
the developer that needs the *ED state, to add it in (assuming they are
aware that this is possible) and put in whatever plumbing might be needed.
Which may mean that they'd have to modify code in another driver, that
didn't need *ED in the first place. (If an *ED state is added, all drivers
using that active state should handle the *ED state too because it is in
the state machine and I'd rather not complicate things by having state-ING
-> state-ED -> stable-state and state-ING -> stable-state.

--ruby
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150219/b7360b87/attachment.html>


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list