Vijay, Pools-monitors are still many to many, if it's not so on the picture - we'll fix that. I brought this up as an example of how we dealt with m:n via API.
Thanks, Eugene. On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Vijay Venkatachalam < vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com> wrote: > Thanks for the clarification. Eugene. > > > > A tangential point since you brought healthmon and pool. > > > > There will be an additional entity called ‘PoolMonitorAssociation’ which > results in a many to many relationship between pool and monitors. Right? > > > > Now, the model is indicating a pool can have only one monitor. So a minor > correction is required to indicate the many to many relationship via > PoolMonitorAssociation. > > > > Thanks, > > Vijay V. > > > > > > *From:* Eugene Nikanorov [mailto:enikano...@mirantis.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 15, 2014 7:36 PM > > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Updated Object Model? > > > > Hi Vijay, > > > > > When you say API is not available, it means this should not be considered > like a resource/entity. Correct? > > > > But then, there would be API like a bind API, that accepts loadbalancer_id > & listener_id, which creates this object. > > And also, there would be an API that will be used to list the listeners of > a LoadBalancer. > > > > Right? > > Right, that's the same as health monitors and pools work right now: > there are separate REST action to associate healthmon to a pool > > > > > > Thanks, > > Eugene. > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
