On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 05:46:11AM +, Prachi Damle wrote:
> Yes, disassociation means on future restarts the VM will not follow
> the affinity group rule.
So the API has implicitly affected the VM I guess then. Should be
fine.
Thanks for entertaining the discussion on this,
--
Prasanna.,
Yes, disassociation means on future restarts the VM will not follow the
affinity group rule.
-Original Message-
From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 9:45 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Renaming updateVMAffinityGroup
the VMs?
> So for this API, the entity operated on is the affinity group - not
> the VM.
>
> Thanks,
> Prachi
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 6:55 AM
> To: CloudStack Dev; Prachi D
,
Prachi
-Original Message-
From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 6:55 AM
To: CloudStack Dev; Prachi Damle
Subject: Re: Renaming updateVMAffinityGroup -> updateAffinityGroup
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:28:20AM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
>
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:28:20AM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:31:46AM -0700, Prachi Damle wrote:
> > Hi Prasanna,
> >
> > The API is to update a VirtualMachine's affinity group associations
> > - it's not really an update operation on an affinity group - hence
>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:31:46AM -0700, Prachi Damle wrote:
> Hi Prasanna,
>
> The API is to update a VirtualMachine's affinity group associations
> - it's not really an update operation on an affinity group - hence
> the odd naming. The resource the API is acting on is a VM.
> Please suggest a
Hi Prasanna,
The API is to update a VirtualMachine's affinity group associations - it's not
really an update operation on an affinity group - hence the odd naming. The
resource the API is acting on is a VM.
Please suggest any other name that seems meaningful and fits the conventions...
-Prachi
