-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update keeper module #33
Open
ivanovmi
wants to merge
3
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
fix_flavor_removing
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's not quite right place to it, that changes affects all the get operations for flavors.
As I remember default flavors have specific names, so what if make a change in main.py on 82 line just for getting that bunch of flavors? That way only default flavors could appear in cache and not the user created flavors if they got here. For getting them you can use even the same
admin_keeper.get()
operation with filter function for a specific line of flavor names) And after that you can look at how cirros avoid to being deleted by the name in spam_factory.py on 454 line, and do the same :)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@FromZeus Hi, thank for review! I think that hardcoding a bunch of names is a wrong way :)
But, also i think that I can move
validate_uuid
method tospam_factory
module, and iterate over list of flavors - and if id of flavor is uuid - we can remove this flavor. This allow us doesn't to break our cloud, and doesn't disrupt logic ofkeeper.get()
methodReason, why I using uuid validation - because standard flavors creates with custom id (not uuid) and our flavors will be created with auto-generated uuid
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey :) Hm... What if somebody will create a custom flavor by hands, so that flavor will have uuid too, then while validating of uuid that flavor will be deleted. Is this possible situation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Possibly yes :)
But if we hardcode some parameters, this will be wrong too (from my POV).
As possible solution, we can save current state to db, and duplicate this info for more safety. Or, we can change mechanism with assigning custom id, like
spamo-{iteration_number}
, and keep resource, if id doesn't start withspamo
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, if you could just pass an id which will contain
spamo-
as prefix and then just check it inspam_factory.py
delete method of flavor that would be a better solution :)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm agree with the use of the defined prefix for all resources to be able to remove them whenever we want.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All the resources have already a distinguish as a placement to the cache thus they could be cleaned up with
spamostack --clean all
for example. But flavors are an exception in sense the default flavors placed to cache for initial usage. So there is no need to use that prefix for all the resources or is there?