The Nova proposal appears to be identical to neutron's, at least from a
consumer perspective.
If I were to pick a winner, I'd follow Sean's advice regarding the 'more'
attribute in responses, and put the total number of resources there; I
would also take Jay's advice of including the total only if requested with
a query param. In this way a user can retrieve the total number of items
regardless of the current pagination index (in my first post I suggested
the total number should be returned only on the first page of results).
Therefore one could ask for a total number of resources with something like
the following:
GET /some_resources?include_total=1
and obtain a response like the following:
{'resources': [{meh}, {meh}, {meh_again}],
'something': {
'_links': {'prev': ..., 'next': ...},
'total': agazillion}
}
where the exact structure and naming of 'something' depends on the outcome
of the discussion at [1]
Salvatore
[1]
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133660/7/guidelines/representation_structure.rst
On 20 November 2014 15:24, Christopher Yeoh <cbky...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:47:16 +0100
> Salvatore Orlando <sorla...@nicira.com> wrote:
>
> > Aloha guardians of the API!
> >
> > I haven recently* reviewed a spec for neutron [1] proposing a
> > distinct URI for returning resource count on list operations.
> > This proposal is for selected neutron resources, but I believe the
> > topic is general enough to require a guideline for the API working
> > group. Your advice is therefore extremely valuable.
> >
> > In a nutshell the proposal is to retrieve resource count in the
> > following way:
> > GET /<prefix>/<resource_name>/count
> >
> > In my limited experience with RESTful APIs, I've never encountered
> > one that does counting in this way. This obviously does not mean it's
> > a bad idea. I think it's not great from a usability perspective to
> > require two distinct URIs to fetch the first page and then the total
> > number of elements. I reckon the first response page for a list
> > operation might include also the total count. For example:
> >
> > {'resources': [{meh}, {meh}, {meh_again}],
> > 'resource_count': 55
> > <link_to_next_page>}
> >
> > I am however completely open to consider other alternatives.
> > What is your opinion on this matter?
>
> FWIW there is a nova spec proposed for counting resources as
> well (I think it might have been previously approved for Juno).
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/134279/
>
> I haven't compared the two, but I can't think of a reason we'd
> need to be any different between projects here.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Salvatore
> >
> >
> > * it's been 10 days now
> >
> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102199/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
