On 4/18/2018 9:06 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
"By default, should resources/traits submitted in different numbered request groups be supplied by separate resource providers?"
Without knowing all of the hairy use cases, I'm trying to channel my inner sdague and some of the similar types of discussions we've had to changes in the compute API, and a lot of the time we've agreed that we shouldn't assume a default in certain cases.
So for this case, if I'm requesting numbered request groups, why doesn't the API just require that I pass a query parameter telling it how I'd like those requests to be handled, either via affinity or anti-affinity.
I'm specifically thinking about the changes to the compute API in microversion 2.37 for get-me-a-network where my initial design was to allow the 'networks' entry in the POST /servers request to remain optional and default to auto-allocate, but without going into details, that could be a problem. So ultimately we just decided that with >=2.37 you have to specify "networks" in POST /servers and we provided specific values for what the networks should be (specific network ID, port ID, auto or none). That way the user knows exactly what they are opting into rather than rely on default behavior in the server, which might bite you (or us) later if we ever want to change that default behavior.
-- Thanks, Matt __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
