You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When I submitted the patch for providerVolumeIds, the whole point was to fill in the data with information that was already provided by the cloud provider. Yet I see that in 2014.03 that that getProviderVolumeIds required a provider as a parameter and makes a separate call to get the volume ids! Why?
Looking at the AWS code, in EC2Instance, lines 2038 through 2080, I see that the code is scanning the results returned from AWS and building Volume entries, and on line 2063-2064 it is even getting the provider volume id, but that code is setting the volume id only in the Volume, and not setting the VirtualMachine.providerVolumeIds. Why not?
And actually, if there is going to be a VirtualMachine.volumes field, why even bother with a VirtualMachine.providerVolumeIds field? One could as easily get the provider volume ids out of VirtualMachine.volumes.
So my suggestion is to drop VirtualMachine.providerVolumeIds, along with its getter and setter - they are not required.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
When I submitted the patch for providerVolumeIds, the whole point was to fill in the data with information that was already provided by the cloud provider. Yet I see that in 2014.03 that that getProviderVolumeIds required a provider as a parameter and makes a separate call to get the volume ids! Why?
Looking at the AWS code, in EC2Instance, lines 2038 through 2080, I see that the code is scanning the results returned from AWS and building Volume entries, and on line 2063-2064 it is even getting the provider volume id, but that code is setting the volume id only in the Volume, and not setting the VirtualMachine.providerVolumeIds. Why not?
And actually, if there is going to be a VirtualMachine.volumes field, why even bother with a VirtualMachine.providerVolumeIds field? One could as easily get the provider volume ids out of VirtualMachine.volumes.
So my suggestion is to drop VirtualMachine.providerVolumeIds, along with its getter and setter - they are not required.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: