Friðvin, Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll go with the schema update.
- Suresh On 21/02/17, 7:02 PM, "Friðvin Logi Oddbjörnsson" <[email protected]> wrote: On 18 February 2017 at 20:51:42, Suresh Anaparti ( [email protected]) wrote: I checked the limits set for VMware hypervisor and observed some discrepancies. These can be either updated from the updateHypervisorCapabilities API (max_data_volumes_limit, max_hosts_per_cluster after improvements) or schema update during upgradation. Which one would be better? For schema update, I have to raise a PR. If these are hard limits for the hypervisors, then I’m more inclined that they be immutable (i.e. to not allow changing them through the API) and, therefor, only updated through a schema update. However, if these are not hard limits for the hypervisors (or if there are some valid reasons for allowing these limits to be easily updated), then having them updatable through the API would make sense. Friðvin Logi Oddbjörnsson Senior Developer Tel: (+354) 415 0200 | [email protected] Mobile: (+354) 696 6528 | PGP Key: 57CA1B00 <https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=vindex&[email protected]> Twitter: @greenqloud <https://twitter.com/greenqloud> | @qstackcloud <https://twitter.com/qstackcloud> www.greenqloud.com | www.qstack.com [image: qstack_blue_landscape_byqreenqloud-01.png] DISCLAIMER ========== This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.
