WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-cim

Re: [Xen-cim] CMPI support of arrays in OUT params

To: Michael Johanssen <JOHANSSN@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-cim] CMPI support of arrays in OUT params
From: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 21:42:28 -0700
Cc: xen-cim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 20:42:07 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <OFC94745E6.D4B1C3B5-ONC125726F.0056A15B-C125726F.00578258@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-cim-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: xen-cim mailing list <xen-cim.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-cim@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-cim>, <mailto:xen-cim-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-cim>, <mailto:xen-cim-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <OFC94745E6.D4B1C3B5-ONC125726F.0056A15B-C125726F.00578258@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-cim-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061206)
Michael Johanssen wrote:
[snip]
Frankly, the plural versions suck anyway :-).  I came to this conclusion
while
implementing AddResourceSettings. Implementation is difficult,
particularly
handling errors.  Imagine successfully adding 2 resources but failing on
the
3rd.  Do you fail the whole thing and attempt to unwind (and perhaps fail
doing
that!)? Or do you proceed forward and indicate half failure?  I don't
like it
and considered the 'one-at-a-time' approach before hitting the 'output
array' >
issue.

I will proceed with this approach unless (strongly) convinced otherwise.

Jim

Jim,

in DMTF SVPC we modelled that way
to enable the client to pass in multiple
logically related requests in one step,
that either succeeds or fails as a whole.
Admittedly that makes things more difficult
for the implementation, but consider that
with the single step approach you leave
the responsiblity for cleanup to the client,
and if he does not care about that responsibility,
then you end up with inconsistent system definitions.

Understood, and don't take my rant personally :-). I recall the conversations and remember Nihar's objection to the original methods. I think the current methods are a great improvement but still consider them a PIA from implementation standpoint :-). I have them implemented but committed the singular versions to our repo due to the CMPI issue. Need to get that resolved before officially supporting the defined methods.

BTW, what do you think of the singular versions? Don't know if there is too much overlap with the existing methods, but might be nice to have them as well. I could image most implementations having the single case and just repeatedly calling it from the multiple resource case. Might be useful to expose the single case as well.

Of course the issue with cmpi needs to be addressed.

Yep.

Regards,
Jim
Michael


_______________________________________________
Xen-cim mailing list
Xen-cim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-cim

_______________________________________________
Xen-cim mailing list
Xen-cim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-cim

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>