----- Original Message -----
> From: "Saggi Mizrahi" <[email protected]>
> To: "arch" <[email protected]>, "VDSM Project Development"
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 6:39:26 PM
> Subject: [RFC] Exception is VDSM
>
> Currently we have very specific exceptions.
> This causes proliferation of exception with no real gain.
>
> There is really no benefit for each call to throw it's own error
> message:
> For instance,
> MiscFileReadException
> MiscFileWriteException
> MiscBlockReadException
> MiscBlockWriteException
> * There are about a 100 of these.
>
> Could all just be "general exception". The user knows what command it
> ran there is no need have the exceptions specify that.
Who is this 'user'?
Does 'user' operation necessary invokes just one of the above in a 1:1
correlation to what he tries to do? no complex operation that may lead to
ambiguity?
>
> Also exception like:
> ImageDoesNotExistInSD
> StoragePoolMasterNotFound
> StoragePoolUnknown
> VMPathNotExists
>
> Actually just mean ENOENT or EntityDoesNotExist in different
> contexts. There is no real reason to distinguish between them
> because they are also context driven.
>
> Cutting down on the amount of exceptions to error archetypes similar
> to standard c errors will give us simpler API.
> Also, having a specific set of exceptions per call means that every
> new API means a new group of supported exceptions. This makes
> forward compatibility very problematic.
> _______________________________________________
> Arch mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
>
_______________________________________________
Arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
