On 10/06/2017 01:22 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: <snip> > So with all of this in mind, should we at least consider, until at least > someone owns supporting this, that the API should fail with a 400 > response if you're trying to rebuild with a new image on a volume-backed > instance? That way it's a fast failure in the API, similar to trying to > backup a volume-backed instance fails fast. > > If we did, that would change the API response from a 202 today to a 400, > which is something we normally don't do. I don't think a microversion > would be necessary if we did this, however, because essentially what the > user is asking for isn't what we're actually giving them, so it's a > failure in an unexpected way even if there is no fault recorded, it's > not what the user asked for. I might not be thinking of something here > though, like interoperability for example - a cloud without this change > would blissfully return 202 but a cloud with the change would return a > 400...so that should be considered.
Yes, and this is the kind of thing I think we'd backport to all stable branches as well. Right now this is effectively a silent 500 (giving a 202 that we know will never actually do what is asked). -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev