replies inline
On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:36 AM Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
wrote:
>
> Would the “permissions” field be better titled as “localizationMethods” or
> “localizationPolicies"? Permissions typically relates to security and access
> control, so it seems a bit out of place here
Yeah, I
>Just to be clear, the ordering of "cachegroup permissions" doesn't matter
because it's really a Set not an Array
>we'd have to overhaul TR
Right. I was just pointing out future extensibility, not suggesting we do
that now.
I do think we could debate whether cachegroups or deliveryservices are
Agreed provided that your join table has no properties (i.e. TableA_id,
TableB_id, order).
On 7/5/18, 9:55 AM, "Volz, Dylan" wrote:
Our APIs will be much easier to use, if we can stop
exposing join tables to the API altogether (e.g.
cachegroup_fallback,
replies inline
On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:24 AM Robert Butts wrote:
>
> +1 on listing them as an array. JSON arrays are defined to be ordered, so
> that lets us use the array order as the lookup order, making it easy to add
> that as a feature in the future.
>
> -1 on array types in the database.
You're not mistaken, Jonathan, that is how the logic basically flows
today; however, with cachegroup fallback configuration now it can be
deep[if enabled] -> cz -> geo[if fallback config allows].
Marking a cachegroup as "CZ-only" is really about filtering possible
cachegroups in selection *after*
