On 09/04/13 11:03 PM, "Min Chen" <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>It may not be that simple to just use api name alias. For example, we >currently have listS3sCmd, with new image store plugin framework, we >introduced a new API "listImageStoresCmd" to cover image stores from >various providers, not only S3. We also introduced a new response >ImageStoreResponse for this new listImageStoreCmd api. So you are >suggesting to use the following naming alias to direct old apis to the new >apis, right? > >@APICommand(name = "listImageStores, listS3s, listSwift", .. > > >But there are two issues here: >1. Previous listS3sCmd api is corresponding to new API >listImageStores&provider=S3, so this will not be a simple redirect. >2. Previous listS3sCmd response is S3Response, which is different from new >ImageStoreResponse, although its information can be found in new >ImageStoreResponse. Will this break back compatibility as well? My $.02 Yes, it will break the backward compatibility. For now keep both the api's, but the UI should start using the new api with listImageStores&provider=S3. We should use deprecated annotation to mark that the api is deprecated just like in the Java Docs and finally remove the api in 5.0. > >Thanks >-min > > >On 4/9/13 10:14 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> >wrote: > >>We can have alias for an existing API. See the other ML discussion. >> >>On 4/9/13 9:27 AM, "Min Chen" <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >>>Yes, I will include more api change details in FS in next few days. >>>According to Chiradeep, it seems that we cannot simply deprecate old API >>>in 4.2, Edison and I will discuss this and update FS with details on how >>>to handle these old APIs. >>> >>>Thanks >>>-min >>> >>>On 4/8/13 6:34 PM, "Sangeetha Hariharan" >>><sangeetha.hariha...@citrix.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>>>Min, >>>> >>>>Could you also include the details of the API changes (new parameters) >>>>that will be proposed as part of this feature? >>>>Also it would be helpful if you list the request and response >>>>parameters >>>>for the new API calls. >>>>For all the API calls that are being deprecated , is there any specific >>>>error message that will be returned? >>>> >>>>-Thanks >>>>Sangeetha >>>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: Min Chen [mailto:min.c...@citrix.com] >>>>Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 4:45 PM >>>>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>>>Subject: [DIscuss]Storage image store plugin framework refactoring >>>> >>>>Hi All, >>>> >>>>Currently CloudStack does not offer a flexible pluggable framework for >>>>users to easily integrate and configure any 3rd-party object stores for >>>>such backup services as registering templates, taking snapshots, etc. >>>>Along with Edison's recent refactored storage subsystem 2.0 that mainly >>>>refactored current CloudStack primary storage implementation, we are >>>>proposing to develop a storage backup object store plugin framework to >>>>allow CloudStack to systematically manage and configure various types >>>>of >>>>backup data stores from different vendors, like NFS, S3, Swift, etc. >>>>With >>>>this new plugin framework, we would like to achieve following >>>>functionalities: >>>>1. Support different object store providers in a uniform and pluggable >>>>fashion. >>>>2. Enable region wide object backup using S3-like object store. >>>>3. Provide pluggable data motion strategies to handle data transfer >>>>from >>>>one data store to another data store. >>>>4. Provide a scalable cache storage framework while moving data between >>>>primary storage and backup storage for certain hypervisor needs. >>>>5. Support flexible combinations of primary storage, secondary storage >>>>and hypervisors, such as (NFS, NFS, Xen), (NF3, S3, Vmware), (ISCSI, >>>>Swift, KVM), ...., etc. >>>>The proposed ImageStore plugin framework architecture is detailed in >>>>our >>>>FS here: >>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Storage+Backup+O >>>>b >>>>j >>>>e >>>>ct+Store+Plugin+Framework. >>>>The JIRA ticket to track this feature is: >>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1975. The work is >>>>currently carried out in feature branch "object_store". >>>>Please let me know your comments and suggestions. >>>> >>>>Thanks >>>>-min >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
