On Thu 17 Dec 2015 01:50:08 AM CET, John Snow <js...@redhat.com> wrote: > In working through a prototype to enable multiple block jobs. A few > problem spots in our API compatibility become apparent. > > In a nutshell, old Blockjobs rely on the "device" to identify the job, > which implies: > > 1) A job is always attached to a device / the root node of a device > 2) There can only be one job per device > 3) A job can only affect one device at a time > 4) Once created, a job will always be associated with that device. > > All four of these are wrong and something we need to change, so > principally the "device" addressing scheme for Jobs needs to go and we > need a new ID addressing scheme instead.
Out of curiosity, do you have specific examples of block jobs that are affected by these problems? For the intermediate block-stream functionality I was having problems because of 1), so I extended the 'device' parameter to identify arbitrary node names as well. Just to make things clear: your proposal looks good to me, I'm only wondering whether you're simply looking for a cleaner API or you have a use case that you cannot fulfill because of the way block jobs work now... Thanks! Berto
