On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 05:19:46PM -0400, Saggi Mizrahi wrote: > Hi, in the API a lot of IDs get passed around are UUIDs. > The point is that as long as you are not the entity generating the UUIDs the > fact that these are UUIDs have no real significance to you. > I suggest removing the validation of UUIDs from the receiving end. There is > no real reason to make sure these are real UUIDs. > It's another restriction we can remove from the interface simplifying the > code and the interface. > > Just to be clear I'm not saying that we should stop using UUIDs. > For example, vdsm will keep generating task IDs as UUIDs. But the > documentation will state that it could be *any* string value. > If for some reason we choose to change the format of task IDs. There will be > no need to change the interface.
IMHO it is worth having strict UUIDs in preference to arbitrary strings, since their fixed size lets you deal with them more efficiently and predictably. > The same goes for VM IDs. Currently the engine uses UUIDs but there > is no reason for VDSM to enforce this and limit the engine from ever > changing it in the future and using other string values. I'm not sure this is correct. IIUC the vmId value is used set the <uuid> element in the libvirt VM XML configuration, and libvirt will strictly validate for a well formed UUID string. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ vdsm-devel mailing list email@example.com https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel