Anees Shaikh <aasha...@google.com> writes:
hi Chris, in OpenConfig models we use enclosing containers on lists based on feedback from some implementors who claimed that it made it more efficient to, for example, retrieve the entire list (ask for the container), retrieve the keys in the list (ask for the list node), or retrieve a particular element of the list (specify the key).
But, I don't think asking for the list node returns only keys, I think it returns the entire content of the node, i.e., it's equivalent to asking for the out container if that container only contains a single list (the model in question here).
Thanks, Chris.
Aside from some stuttering in the paths (which can be a little annoying but I don't expect to write the config instances by hand), there didn't seem to be a major downside. So we try to be consistent across the models with this approach. After getting some more experience with the implementations, we might revisit.thanks. -- AneesOn Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote:Hi,Use of NP-containers are subjective, based on how you want to organize your data. The extra layer of containment may be a waste, but it sometimes has a purpose- 2 or more sibling lists with lots of entries can be mixed in JSON, so putting each list in its container prevents that. - There is no standard way to 'delete-all' in NETCONF or RESTCONF but a 'replace' on the parent container can be used for this purpose. (container of list or leaf-list) - container servers as a conceptual 'root' for external augmentsAndyOn Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Christian Hopps <cho...@chopps.org>wrote:Some models seem to place a single list of things inside a container also named after the items in the list, e.g.,+--ro modulename +--rw ribs +--rw rib* [name] +--rw name I don't see the purpose of these containers. It seems to me that one can model and query the exact same data without the outer container. That is,+--ro modulename +--rw rib* [name] +--rw name Is there something useful about these containers that I've missed, as it's a fairly common pattern in the models I've been looking at. Example comparisons below.. Thanks, Chris.w/ container: <modulename> <ribs> <rib> <name>foo</name> </rib> <rib> <name>bar</name> </rib> ... </ribs> </modulename> w/o container: <modulename> <rib> <name>foo</name> </rib> <rib> <name>bar</name> </rib> ... </modulename> Likewise if you want to fetch all ribs you can either way:<filter> <modulename> <ribs/> </modulename> </filter> or<filter> <modulename> <rib/> </modulename> </filter> Or a particular rib<filter> <modulename> <ribs> <rib> <name>foo</name> </rib> </ribs> </modulename> </filter> or<filter> <modulename> <rib> <name>foo</name> </rib> </modulename> </filter> Using xpath:/modulename/ribs/rib[name='foo'] or/modulename/rib[name='foo']_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
