| openstackgerrit | zengchen proposed openstack/smaug: operation engine design https://review.openstack.org/262649 | 02:50 |
|---|---|---|
| openstackgerrit | chenying proposed openstack/smaug: Basic design doc for API Service https://review.openstack.org/266338 | 03:05 |
| openstackgerrit | chenying proposed openstack/smaug: Basic design doc for API Service https://review.openstack.org/266338 | 03:27 |
| openstackgerrit | chenying proposed openstack/smaug: Basic design doc for API Service https://review.openstack.org/266338 | 03:40 |
| openstackgerrit | chenying proposed openstack/smaug: Basic design doc for API Service https://review.openstack.org/266338 | 07:09 |
| openstackgerrit | chenying proposed openstack/smaug: Basic design doc for API Service https://review.openstack.org/266338 | 07:25 |
| *** yinweiphone has joined #openstack-smaug | 07:53 | |
| *** yinweiphone has quit IRC | 07:57 | |
| *** saggi has quit IRC | 08:37 | |
| *** wangliuan has joined #openstack-smaug | 08:59 | |
| openstackgerrit | Saggi Mizrahi proposed openstack/smaug: Proposed Smaug API v1.0 https://review.openstack.org/244756 | 09:21 |
| *** gsagie has joined #openstack-smaug | 10:06 | |
| *** gsagie has left #openstack-smaug | 10:06 | |
| *** wangliuan has quit IRC | 12:05 | |
| *** wangliuan has joined #openstack-smaug | 12:05 | |
| *** saggi has joined #openstack-smaug | 12:41 | |
| *** gampel has joined #openstack-smaug | 13:22 | |
| gampel | Hi saggi | 13:58 |
| saggi | gampel: hey | 13:58 |
| gampel | saggi: whats up | 13:59 |
| saggi | gampel: All good | 13:59 |
| gampel | You notice all the reviews | 14:01 |
| saggi | gampel: Yes, I already put up a new API patchset | 14:02 |
| saggi | I helped Omer set up VMs | 14:02 |
| saggi | Now I'm working on the Pluggable Provider comments | 14:02 |
| gampel | saggi: we need to discuss 2 items | 14:03 |
| gampel | 1) progress of protect operation feedback | 14:03 |
| saggi | gampel: What about it? | 14:05 |
| gampel | Currently we provide protect status via Checkpoint access correct ? | 14:06 |
| saggi | Yes | 14:06 |
| gampel | Do we provide per plug in implicit status | 14:07 |
| saggi | Yes | 14:07 |
| gampel | What are the status options In progress and done or % | 14:08 |
| saggi | Depending on what the plugin can provide. | 14:08 |
| gampel | will it be part of th result schema | 14:09 |
| saggi | Yes | 14:09 |
| saggi | When you look at the checkpoint you'll see it in the resource information | 14:09 |
| saggi | Seems the simplest thing to do | 14:09 |
| saggi | And it works even when the process failes | 14:09 |
| gampel | And for the all Protect the checkpoint ? | 14:09 |
| saggi | So you know it failed at 67% | 14:09 |
| saggi | I don't understand the question | 14:10 |
| gampel | we will have status in the TOP checkpoint namespace | 14:10 |
| gampel | what will be his values ? | 14:11 |
| saggi | To start we should just have a status. | 14:12 |
| saggi | But we could add `M out of N` resources successfully protected | 14:12 |
| gampel | It will be an Explicit Value in the return checkpoint read ? | 14:13 |
| saggi | If we decide to supply it. But if we do we will have to manage to it too. | 14:14 |
| saggi | Seems like more work that it's worth. Do we think users care for that specific information? | 14:15 |
| gampel | 10 min i will call you | 14:16 |
| saggi | sure | 14:16 |
| *** gampel has quit IRC | 19:25 | |
| *** gampel has joined #openstack-smaug | 23:34 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!