Open Stack

Hi all,
I think we just power the scheduler API to be able to add and remove
candidates is enough.

As mentioned this thread, the agent just doesn't receive new request but
still keep old service alive.
So, just stop schedule new request to it. Direct and simple.

Hope my expression is clear enough.
Germy

On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

> Adding [api] topic.
>
> On 01/08/2015 07:47 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
>
>> Is there another openstack service that allows this so we can make the
>> API consistent between the two when this change is made?
>>
>
> Kevin, thank you VERY much for asking the above question and caring about
> consistency in the APIs!
>
> There was a discussion on the ML about this very area of the APIs, and how
> there is current inconsistency to resolve:
>
> http://openstack-dev.openstack.narkive.com/UbM1J7dH/horizon-all-status-
> vs-state
>
> You were involved in that thread, so I know you're very familiar with the
> problem domain :)
>
> In the above thread, I mentioned that this really was something that the
> API WG should tackle, and this here ML thread should be a catalyst for
> getting that done.
>
> What we need is a patch proposed to the openstack/api-wg that proposes
> some guidelines around the REST API structure for "disabling some resource
> for administrative purposes", with some content that discusses the semantic
> differences between "state" and "status", and makes recommendations on the
> naming of resource attributes that indicate an admnistrative state.
>
> Of course, this doesn't really address Jack M's question about whether
> there should be a separate "mode" (in Jack's terms) to indicate that some
> resource can be only manually assigned and not automatically assigned.
> Personally, I don't feel there is a need for another mode. I think if
> something has been administratively disabled, that an administrator should
> still be able to manually alter that thing.
>
> All the best,
> -jay
>
>  On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Carl Baldwin <carl at ecbaldwin.net
>> <mailto:carl at ecbaldwin.net>> wrote:
>>
>>     I added a link to @Jack's post to the ML to the bug report [1].  I am
>>     willing to support @Itsuro with reviews of the implementation and am
>>     willing to consult if you need and would like to ping me.
>>
>>     Carl
>>
>>     [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1408488
>>
>>     On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:49 AM, McCann, Jack <jack.mccann at hp.com
>>     <mailto:jack.mccann at hp.com>> wrote:
>>      > +1 on need for this feature
>>      >
>>      > The way I've thought about this is we need a mode that stops the
>>     *automatic*
>>      > scheduling of routers/dhcp-servers to specific hosts/agents,
>>     while allowing
>>      > manual assignment of routers/dhcp-servers to those hosts/agents,
>>     and where
>>      > any existing routers/dhcp-servers on those hosts continue to
>>     operate as normal.
>>      >
>>      > The maintenance use case was mentioned: I want to evacuate
>>     routers/dhcp-servers
>>      > from a host before taking it down, and having the scheduler add
>>     new routers/dhcp
>>      > while I'm evacuating the node is a) an annoyance, and b) causes a
>>     service blip
>>      > when I have to right away move that new router/dhcp to another
>> host.
>>      >
>>      > The other use case is adding a new host/agent into an existing
>>     environment.
>>      > I want to be able to bring the new host/agent up and into the
>>     neutron config, but
>>      > I don't want any of my customers' routers/dhcp-servers scheduled
>>     there until I've
>>      > had a chance to assign some test routers/dhcp-servers and make
>>     sure the new server
>>      > is properly configured and fully operational.
>>      >
>>      > - Jack
>>      >
>>      > _______________________________________________
>>      > OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>      > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>     <mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>>      > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>     OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>     <mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kevin Benton
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150114/c147646b/attachment.html>