On 4/27/23 19:54, Han Zhou wrote: >> (Random thought) NB could have an API (ChassisDeprovisionRequest?) >> that would be used by CMS to request cleanup for a chassis by name. >> Northd could then update the object with the status of the request, or >> delete it once it's processed. >> > This may work, but I'd avoid any imperative approach if possible. NB (and > also SB) should just maintain the desired states and let the > controllers/daemons to converge. > A "request" may be failed/timeout/invalid/out-of-date, which needs to be > transactional and will be relatively complex to handle. > > If the direct connection to SB is really the only concern, I think the most > viable approach is still to add a chassis table in NB just for CMS to > specify the valid chassis that should exist, and ovn-northd (probably with > a new thread) will take care of the cleanup. This is simple and scalable.
Do we really need a new thread? We don't really expect chassis related changes to happen often. > The only question is whether it's worth making this change. > The fact that it's a relatively simple patch is an argument for making the change IMO. Regards, Dumitru _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
