Hello Vijay! Well this is a hold over from v1, but the status is a provisioning status. So yes, when something is deployed successfully it should be ACTIVE. The exception to this is the member status, in that it's status can be INACTIVE if a health check fails. Now this will probably cause edge cases when health checks and updates are happening to the same member. It's been talked about before, but we need to really have two types of status fields, provisioning and operational. IMHO, that should be something we try to get into K.
Thanks, Brandon On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 09:28 +0000, Vijay Venkatachalam wrote: > Hi: > > I think we had some discussions around ‘status’ > attribute earlier, I don’t recollect the conclusion. > > Does it reflect the deployment status? > > Meaning, if the status of an entity is ACTIVE, the user > has to infer that the entity is deployed successfully in the > backend/loadbalancer. > > Thanks, > > Vijay V. > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
