hi, Ming

If we support both styles, it should be:

curl -XPATCH http://172.17.0.1:9080/apisix/admin/upstreams/1/methods -d
‘["GET"]’


Self register and not affect other nodes:

curl -XPATCH http://172.17.0.1:9080/apisix/admin/upstreams/1/nodes -d ‘{"
172.17.0.6:8080": 10}’


Self unregister and not affect other nodes:

curl -XPATCH http://172.17.0.1:9080/apisix/admin/upstreams/1/nodes -d ‘{"
172.17.0.6:8080": null}’



Multiple implementations do confuse users, but it should be better than not
meeting the needs. .


On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:51 AM Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org> wrote:

> hi,junxu,
> please show the example how to resolve:
> "methods": ["GET", null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null]
>
> IMO, multiple implementations will confuse users.
>
> Thanks,
> Ming Wen, Apache APISIX(incubating) & Apache SkyWalking
> Twitter: _WenMing
>
>
> junxu chen <chenju...@apache.org> 于2020年7月14日周二 上午9:28写道:
>
> > I think We could support both styles.
> > Want to update a certain attribute in full, use the old style.
> > Want to partially update, use the current style.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:15 AM Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > For example, if user want to update the `method` of
> > > `/apisix/admin/routes/1`,
> > > user need to PATCH with data: `"methods": ["GET", null, null, null,
> null,
> > > null, null, null, null]`. For me, I don't know why I need a lot of
> `null`
> > > after "GET".
> > >
> > > I suggest we focus on solving these kinds of problems first.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ming Wen, Apache APISIX(incubating) & Apache SkyWalking
> > > Twitter: _WenMing
> > >
> > >
> > > YuanSheng Wang <membp...@apache.org> 于2020年7月14日周二 上午8:52写道:
> > >
> > > > old style:
> > > > curl -XPATCH http://127.0.0.1:9080/apisix/admin/upstreams/1/nodes -d
> > ‘{"
> > > > 127.0.0.1:8083":3}’
> > > >
> > > > current style:
> > > > curl -XPATCH http://127.0.0.1:9080/apisix/admin/upstreams/1 -d
> > ‘{nodes:
> > > {"
> > > > 127.0.0.1:8083":3}}’
> > > >
> > > > They are the same and all idempotent.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 7:27 AM Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > hi, jinwei,
> > > > > we need to roll back the current PATCH implementation if you want
> > this
> > > > > style of admin api.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > jinwei <gxt...@163.com> 于 2020年7月14日周二 上午12:25写道:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I used to use this API a lot
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > curl -XPATCH
> http://127.0.0.1:9080/apisix/admin/upstreams/1/nodes
> > -d
> > > > ‘{"
> > > > > > 127.0.0.1:8083":3}’
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I like this API very much, because it is idempotent. We can
> clearly
> > > > know
> > > > > > that the result of nodes is the element I specify and will not be
> > > > > affected
> > > > > > by history;
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This API is also useful for service registration and discovery !
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hope to keep this API
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you very much
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At 2020-07-13 22:25:43, "YuanSheng Wang" <membp...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >{
> > > > > > >    desc: xxxx,
> > > > > > >    id: xxxx,
> > > > > > >    nodes: ["xx", "yy", "zz"]
> > > > > > >}
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I have one question, if we want to update the `desc` and
> `nodes`,
> > > how
> > > > to
> > > > > > do
> > > > > > >with this case?
> > > > > > >The old API style does not support this way.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Should we support this case? Otherwise, we will never support
> > > updating
> > > > > > part
> > > > > > >of the data like this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 10:52 AM Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Agreed, it's acceptable. We should keep user-friendly.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > > > >> Ming Wen, Apache APISIX(incubating) & Apache SkyWalking
> > > > > > >> Twitter: _WenMing
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Zhiyuan Ju <juzhiy...@apache.org> 于2020年7月13日周一 上午6:42写道:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > I think when facing the issue you mentioned, we just
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > PATCH {methods: [GET, POST]}
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > , and API should just do a “PUT Like” action for the
> “methods”
> > > > > filed.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Data with some fixed length “null” is confusing actually.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org>于2020年7月12日 周日下午10:45写道:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > Whether to roll back has nothing to do with  new or old
> > > commit.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > The current implementation is not in compliance with the
> > > > > > specifications
> > > > > > >> > and
> > > > > > >> > > user perception, there is no need to keep.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > APISIX is API gateway, the admin api must follow good
> design
> > > > > > >> > > specifications.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > YuanSheng Wang <membp...@apache.org> 于 2020年7月12日周日
> > > 下午10:13写道:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > It is not a good idea to `roll back` the PATCH
> > > implementation
> > > > > for
> > > > > > >> admin
> > > > > > >> > > > API.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > 1. it is an old commit.
> > > > > > >> > > > 2. we can support the sub `PATH` if we need to support
> it.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:07 PM Ming Wen <
> > > wenm...@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > I think the design of admin api should refer to google
> > API
> > > > > > design
> > > > > > >> > > doc[1],
> > > > > > >> > > > > and this makes it easy to reach consensus with users.
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > [1]
> > https://cloud.google.com/apis/design/standard_methods
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > >> > > > > Ming Wen, Apache APISIX(incubating) & Apache
> SkyWalking
> > > > > > >> > > > > Twitter: _WenMing
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org> 于2020年7月12日周日 下午9:56写道:
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > hello, all,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > A user has reported a issue[1] about PATCH method of
> > > admin
> > > > > > API.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > I looked at the PR[2] that was causing user
> confusion,
> > > > and I
> > > > > > >> think
> > > > > > >> > > the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > user is using it in the right way and our
> > implementation
> > > > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > inappropriate.
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > For example, if user want to update the `method` of
> > > > > > >> > > > > `/apisix/admin/routes/1`,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > user need to PATCH with data: `"methods": ["GET",
> > null,
> > > > > null,
> > > > > > >> null,
> > > > > > >> > > > null,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > null, null, null, null]`. For me, I don't know why I
> > > need
> > > > a
> > > > > > lot
> > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > >> > > > `null`
> > > > > > >> > > > > > after "GET".
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > From the user's perspective, the current
> > implementation
> > > is
> > > > > not
> > > > > > >> > > > > > appropriate. So I suggest  roll back the current
> PATCH
> > > > > > >> > > > implementation[2]
> > > > > > >> > > > > > for admin api.
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > what do you think?
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > [1]
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-apisix/issues/1823
> > > > > > >> > > > > > [2]
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-apisix/pull/1609
> > > > > > >> > > > > > [3]
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-apisix/pull/1609/files#diff-00625723b6e737f3cdb18af67165b70fR996
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Ming Wen, Apache APISIX(incubating) & Apache
> > SkyWalking
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Twitter: _WenMing
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > --
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > *MembPhis*
> > > > > > >> > > > My GitHub: https://github.com/membphis
> > > > > > >> > > > Apache APISIX:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-apisix
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > --
> > > > > > >> > 来自 琚致远
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >--
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >*MembPhis*
> > > > > > >My GitHub: https://github.com/membphis
> > > > > > >Apache APISIX: https://github.com/apache/incubator-apisix
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > *MembPhis*
> > > > My GitHub: https://github.com/membphis
> > > > Apache APISIX: https://github.com/apache/incubator-apisix
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to