On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 11:19:45AM -0500, Andrew Laski wrote: > > On 02/02/2015 05:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >On Sun, Feb 01, 2015 at 11:20:08AM -0800, Noel Burton-Krahn wrote: > >>Thanks for bringing this up, Daniel. I don't think it makes sense to have > >>a timeout on live migration, but operators should be able to cancel it, > >>just like any other unbounded long-running process. For example, there's > >>no timeout on file transfers, but they need an interface report progress > >>and to cancel them. That would imply an option to cancel evacuation too. > >There has been periodic talk about a generic "tasks API" in Nova for managing > >long running operations and getting information about their progress, but I > >am not sure what the status of that is. It would obviously be applicable to > >migration if that's a route we took. > > Currently the status of a tasks API is that it would happen after the API > v2.1 microversions work has created a suitable framework in which to add > tasks to the API.
So is all work on tasks blocked by the microversions support ? I would have though that would only block places where we need to modify existing APIs. Are we not able to add APIs for listing / cancelling tasks as new APIs without such a dependency on microversions ? Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| __________________________________________________________________________ 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
