Hi, I agree with Logan I am wondering if you can share a use case with multiple health monitors.
German From: Brandon Logan [mailto:brandon.lo...@rackspace.com] Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 5:41 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Updated Object Model? I have concerns about multiple health monitors on the same pool. Is this always going to be the same type of health monitor? There's also ambiguity in the case where one health monitor fails and another doesn't. Is it an AND or OR that determines whether the member is down or not? Thanks, Brandon Logan From: Eugene Nikanorov <enikano...@mirantis.com<mailto:enikano...@mirantis.com>> Reply-To: "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Date: Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 9:55 AM To: "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Updated Object Model? 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<mailto: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<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<mailto: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
