You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@stratos.apache.org by Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com> on 2014/09/24 21:57:36 UTC
[Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Hi all,
Shall we have the $subject tomorrow (Fri, Sep 26) at 10.30 AM GMT+5:30 ?
We will be reviewing about the new Stratos feature to register a
Kubernetes cluster endpoint.
Thanks.
--
Akila Ravihansa Perera
Software Engineer, WSO2
Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nguyen Anh Tu <tu...@apache.org>.
+1. I'm happy to join.
--Tuna
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Shall we have the $subject tomorrow (Fri, Sep 26) at 10.30 AM GMT+5:30 ?
>>
>> We will be reviewing about the new Stratos feature to register a
>> Kubernetes cluster endpoint.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> --
>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>
>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Nirmal
>
> Nirmal Fernando.
> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>
> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Manula Chathurika Thantriwatte <ma...@wso2.com>.
Hi,
Yes, these videos should be in the Stratos hangout page.
@Madura, can you please upload these videos to hangout page.
Thanks !
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Tuna,
>
> All the videos are in Stratos YouTube channel.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCqARs7q_p8
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3xPGQb7XGI
>
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Nguyen Anh Tu <tu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can't wait to see the video :-) Are we supposed to upload video to
>> hangout page? http://stratos.apache.org/events/hangouts.html
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --Tuna
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Gayan Gunarathne <ga...@wso2.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Yeah I also think we can remove the stub invoke part from the rest
>>> endpoint component. AFAIR back end stub invoking will not be
>>> the responsibility of the rest endpoint.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Gayan
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Another point I would like to highlight, it seems that we are having a
>>>> dependency to stub bundles in rest.endpoint bundles, which I feel not
>>>> correct as rest.endpoint bundles don't invoke stubs,
>>>> instead rest endpoint invokes manager component, which is the one
>>>> invokes the back end services via stubs. So in that case we should move the
>>>> object conversion (from "common" to stub") in to the manager bundle, not to
>>>> be done in the rest endpoint component.
>>>> wdyt?
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by
>>>>>>> directly instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
>>>>>>> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed
>>>>>>> only via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixed it now. It is using kubernetes manager instead of AS API.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Great!
>>>>>
>>>>>> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
>>>>>>> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
>>>>>>> consistent.
>>>>>>> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the
>>>>>>> interface, its no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain
>>>>>>> the consistency, So I would like to suggest to
>>>>>>> rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as AutoScalerService.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sajith@wso2.com
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
>>>>>>>> returned instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client
>>>>>>>> side easy, otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the
>>>>>>>> updated object ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Sajith
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>>>>>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup.
>>>>>>>>> Hence ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference
>>>>>>>>> to KubernetesGroup. I mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId
>>>>>>>>> filed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>>>>>>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>>>>>>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>>>>>>>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I
>>>>>>>>> could see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to
>>>>>>>>> identify which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host
>>>>>>>>> from that group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
>>>>>>>>> object, then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
>>>>>>>>> need to pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>>>>>>>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the
>>>>>>>>> same reason as above.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It will improve the performance.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wdyt?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>>>>>>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the
>>>>>>>>>> groupId in
>>>>>>>>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>>>>>>>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>>>>>>>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this
>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> [1]
>>>>>>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>>>>>>>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>>>>>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about
>>>>>>>>>> the technical
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to
>>>>>>>>>> RESTful
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> design
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> For eg -
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService
>>>>>>>>>> interface
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to
>>>>>>>>>> make the
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> naming
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> consistent?
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> > +1
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>>>>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>>>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>>>>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>>>>> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> > Nirmal
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>>>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>>>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>>>>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc.,
>>>>>>>> http://wso2.com <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Gayan Gunarathne
>>> Technical Lead
>>> WSO2 Inc. (http://wso2.com)
>>> email : gayang@wso2.com | mobile : +94 766819985
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Nirmal
>
> Nirmal Fernando.
> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>
> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>
--
Regards,
Manula Chathurika Thantriwatte
Software Engineer
WSO2 Inc. : http://wso2.com
lean . enterprise . middleware
email : manulac@wso2.com / manula@apache.org
phone : +94 772492511
blog : http://manulachathurika.blogspot.com/
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>.
Hi Tuna,
All the videos are in Stratos YouTube channel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCqARs7q_p8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3xPGQb7XGI
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Nguyen Anh Tu <tu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can't wait to see the video :-) Are we supposed to upload video to hangout
> page? http://stratos.apache.org/events/hangouts.html
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Tuna
>
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Gayan Gunarathne <ga...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Yeah I also think we can remove the stub invoke part from the rest
>> endpoint component. AFAIR back end stub invoking will not be
>> the responsibility of the rest endpoint.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gayan
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Another point I would like to highlight, it seems that we are having a
>>> dependency to stub bundles in rest.endpoint bundles, which I feel not
>>> correct as rest.endpoint bundles don't invoke stubs,
>>> instead rest endpoint invokes manager component, which is the one
>>> invokes the back end services via stubs. So in that case we should move the
>>> object conversion (from "common" to stub") in to the manager bundle, not to
>>> be done in the rest endpoint component.
>>> wdyt?
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by
>>>>>> directly instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
>>>>>> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed
>>>>>> only via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixed it now. It is using kubernetes manager instead of AS API.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> Great!
>>>>
>>>>> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
>>>>>> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
>>>>>> consistent.
>>>>>> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the
>>>>>> interface, its no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain
>>>>>> the consistency, So I would like to suggest to
>>>>>> rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as AutoScalerService.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
>>>>>>> returned instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client
>>>>>>> side easy, otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the
>>>>>>> updated object ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Sajith
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>>>>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup.
>>>>>>>> Hence ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference
>>>>>>>> to KubernetesGroup. I mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId
>>>>>>>> filed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>>>>>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>>>>>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>>>>>>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I
>>>>>>>> could see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to
>>>>>>>> identify which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host
>>>>>>>> from that group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
>>>>>>>> object, then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
>>>>>>>> need to pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>>>>>>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same
>>>>>>>> reason as above.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It will improve the performance.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wdyt?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>>>>>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>>>>>>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>>>>>>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this
>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> [1]
>>>>>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>>>>>>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>>>>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>>>>>>>>> technical
>>>>>>>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to
>>>>>>>>> RESTful
>>>>>>>>> >> >> design
>>>>>>>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> For eg -
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to
>>>>>>>>> make the
>>>>>>>>> >> >> naming
>>>>>>>>> >> >> consistent?
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> > +1
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>>>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>>>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>>>> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> > Nirmal
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>>>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>>>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>
>>>
>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Gayan Gunarathne
>> Technical Lead
>> WSO2 Inc. (http://wso2.com)
>> email : gayang@wso2.com | mobile : +94 766819985
>>
>>
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Nirmal
Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nguyen Anh Tu <tu...@apache.org>.
Hi,
Can't wait to see the video :-) Are we supposed to upload video to hangout
page? http://stratos.apache.org/events/hangouts.html
Thanks,
--Tuna
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Gayan Gunarathne <ga...@wso2.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> Yeah I also think we can remove the stub invoke part from the rest
> endpoint component. AFAIR back end stub invoking will not be
> the responsibility of the rest endpoint.
>
> Thanks,
> Gayan
>
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Another point I would like to highlight, it seems that we are having a
>> dependency to stub bundles in rest.endpoint bundles, which I feel not
>> correct as rest.endpoint bundles don't invoke stubs,
>> instead rest endpoint invokes manager component, which is the one invokes
>> the back end services via stubs. So in that case we should move the object
>> conversion (from "common" to stub") in to the manager bundle, not to be
>> done in the rest endpoint component.
>> wdyt?
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by
>>>>> directly instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
>>>>> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed
>>>>> only via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fixed it now. It is using kubernetes manager instead of AS API.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> Great!
>>>
>>>> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
>>>>> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
>>>>> consistent.
>>>>> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the
>>>>> interface, its no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain
>>>>> the consistency, So I would like to suggest to
>>>>> rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as AutoScalerService.
>>>>>
>>>>> thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
>>>>>> returned instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client
>>>>>> side easy, otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the
>>>>>> updated object ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Sajith
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>>>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup.
>>>>>>> Hence ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference
>>>>>>> to KubernetesGroup. I mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId
>>>>>>> filed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>>>>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>>>>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>>>>>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I
>>>>>>> could see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to
>>>>>>> identify which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host
>>>>>>> from that group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
>>>>>>> object, then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
>>>>>>> need to pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>>>>>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same
>>>>>>> reason as above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It will improve the performance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wdyt?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>>>>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>>>>>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>>>>>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>>>>>>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> [1]
>>>>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>>>>>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>>>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>>>>>>>> technical
>>>>>>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to
>>>>>>>> RESTful
>>>>>>>> >> >> design
>>>>>>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> For eg -
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to
>>>>>>>> make the
>>>>>>>> >> >> naming
>>>>>>>> >> >> consistent?
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> > +1
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>>> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> > Nirmal
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>
>>>
>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>
>>
>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Gayan Gunarathne
> Technical Lead
> WSO2 Inc. (http://wso2.com)
> email : gayang@wso2.com | mobile : +94 766819985
>
>
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Gayan Gunarathne <ga...@wso2.com>.
+1
Yeah I also think we can remove the stub invoke part from the rest
endpoint component. AFAIR back end stub invoking will not be
the responsibility of the rest endpoint.
Thanks,
Gayan
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Another point I would like to highlight, it seems that we are having a
> dependency to stub bundles in rest.endpoint bundles, which I feel not
> correct as rest.endpoint bundles don't invoke stubs,
> instead rest endpoint invokes manager component, which is the one invokes
> the back end services via stubs. So in that case we should move the object
> conversion (from "common" to stub") in to the manager bundle, not to be
> done in the rest endpoint component.
> wdyt?
>
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <rajkumarr@wso2.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by
>>>> directly instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
>>>> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed
>>>> only via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Fixed it now. It is using kubernetes manager instead of AS API.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> Great!
>>
>>> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
>>>> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
>>>> consistent.
>>>> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
>>>> its no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
>>>> consistency, So I would like to suggest to
>>>> rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as AutoScalerService.
>>>>
>>>> thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
>>>>> returned instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client
>>>>> side easy, otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the
>>>>> updated object ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Sajith
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
>>>>>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
>>>>>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>>>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>>>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>>>>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I
>>>>>> could see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to
>>>>>> identify which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host
>>>>>> from that group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
>>>>>> object, then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
>>>>>> need to pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>>>>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same
>>>>>> reason as above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It will improve the performance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wdyt?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>>>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
>>>>>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>>>>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>>>>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>>>>>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>>>>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>>>>>>> technical
>>>>>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to
>>>>>>> RESTful
>>>>>>> >> >> design
>>>>>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> For eg -
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to
>>>>>>> make the
>>>>>>> >> >> naming
>>>>>>> >> >> consistent?
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > +1
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>> > Best Regards,
>>>>>>> > Nirmal
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>
>>
>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>
>
> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>
--
Best Regards,
Gayan Gunarathne
Technical Lead
WSO2 Inc. (http://wso2.com)
email : gayang@wso2.com | mobile : +94 766819985
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>.
Hi all,
Another point I would like to highlight, it seems that we are having a
dependency to stub bundles in rest.endpoint bundles, which I feel not
correct as rest.endpoint bundles don't invoke stubs,
instead rest endpoint invokes manager component, which is the one invokes
the back end services via stubs. So in that case we should move the object
conversion (from "common" to stub") in to the manager bundle, not to be
done in the rest endpoint component.
wdyt?
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
>>> instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
>>> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed
>>> only via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>>>
>>
>> Fixed it now. It is using kubernetes manager instead of AS API.
>>
>>>
>>>
> Great!
>
>> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
>>> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
>>> consistent.
>>> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
>>> its no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
>>> consistency, So I would like to suggest to
>>> rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as AutoScalerService.
>>>
>>> thoughts?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>>>>
>>>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
>>>> returned instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client
>>>> side easy, otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the
>>>> updated object ?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Sajith
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <
>>>> rajkumarr@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
>>>>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
>>>>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>>>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I
>>>>> could see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to
>>>>> identify which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host
>>>>> from that group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
>>>>> object, then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
>>>>> need to pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>>>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same
>>>>> reason as above.
>>>>>
>>>>> It will improve the performance.
>>>>>
>>>>> wdyt?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
>>>>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>>>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>>>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>>>>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>>>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>>>>>> technical
>>>>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to
>>>>>> RESTful
>>>>>> >> >> design
>>>>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> For eg -
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> >> >> naming
>>>>>> >> >> consistent?
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > +1
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>>>>> >> > Nirmal
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> > Best Regards,
>>>>>> > Nirmal
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>
>>>
>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>
>
> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>
--
*Sajith Kariyawasam*
*Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
<http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>.
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
>> instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
>> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed only
>> via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>>
>
> Fixed it now. It is using kubernetes manager instead of AS API.
>
>>
>>
Great!
> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
>> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
>> consistent.
>> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
>> its no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
>> consistency, So I would like to suggest to
>> rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as AutoScalerService.
>>
>> thoughts?
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>>>
>>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
>>> returned instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client
>>> side easy, otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the
>>> updated object ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sajith
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <rajkumarr@wso2.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
>>>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
>>>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>>>>
>>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>>
>>>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I
>>>> could see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to
>>>> identify which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host
>>>> from that group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
>>>> object, then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
>>>> need to pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same
>>>> reason as above.
>>>>
>>>> It will improve the performance.
>>>>
>>>> wdyt?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>>>
>>>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
>>>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>>>
>>>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>>>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>>>>> technical
>>>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to
>>>>> RESTful
>>>>> >> >> design
>>>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> For eg -
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make
>>>>> the
>>>>> >> >> naming
>>>>> >> >> consistent?
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > +1
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > --
>>>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>>>> >> > Nirmal
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> --
>>>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Best Regards,
>>>>> > Nirmal
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>
>>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>>
>>>
>>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>
>>
>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>
--
*Sajith Kariyawasam*
*Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
<http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com> wrote:
> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
> instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed only
> via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>
Fixed it now. It is using kubernetes manager instead of AS API.
>
> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
> consistent.
> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
> its no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
> consistency, So I would like to suggest to
> rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as AutoScalerService.
>
> thoughts?
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>>
>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is returned
>> instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side easy,
>> otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the updated
>> object ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sajith
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
>>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
>>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>>>
>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>
>>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could
>>> see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
>>> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from that
>>> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost object,
>>> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we need to
>>> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same
>>> reason as above.
>>>
>>> It will improve the performance.
>>>
>>> wdyt?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>>
>>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
>>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>>
>>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>>> >>
>>>> >> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>>>> technical
>>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to
>>>> RESTful
>>>> >> >> design
>>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> For eg -
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make
>>>> the
>>>> >> >> naming
>>>> >> >> consistent?
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > +1
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > --
>>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>>> >> > Nirmal
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Best Regards,
>>>> > Nirmal
>>>> >
>>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>> >
>>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>
>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>>
>>
>> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>
>
> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>
--
Rajkumar Rajaratnam
Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Hi
>
> > Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
> > instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
> > AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed only
> > via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>
> +1. This is completely against the web services model. Just noticed that
>
> org/apache/stratos/autoscaler/client/cloud/controller/CloudControllerClient.java
> class is creating an instance of AutoscalerImpl. Will have to fix
> this. Nice finding Sajith!
>
> > Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
> > Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are
> not
> > consistent.
> > IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
> its
> > no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
> consistency,
> > So I would like to suggest to rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as
> > AutoScalerService.
> >
> > thoughts?
>
> +1
>
> I''ll create JIRAs to track these tasks. I too think that it is
> important to clean up this code in a proper way.
>
> >> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
> returned
> >> instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side
> easy,
> >> otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the updated
> >> object ?
>
> +1
> Yes, that would be make things easy in client side.
>
>
> >>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
> >>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to
> KubernetesGroup. I
> >>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
> >>>
> >>> There are some advantages of doing this.
> >>>
> >>> We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
> >>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both
> KubernetesGroupId
> >>> and KubernetesHost object.
> >>> removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could see
> >>> that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
> >>> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from
> that
> >>> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
> object,
> >>> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
> need to
> >>> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
> >>> updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same reason as
> >>> above.
> >>>
> >>> It will improve the performance.
>
> IMO, doing that will only add more complexity to the code. I don't see
> a beneficial performance gain for that kind of increase in the
> complexity.
>
> If we do that, then we will have to add more annotations to hide
> kubernetesGroupId in the json object serialization. Because we do not
> want users to change the kubernetes groupId when updating host
> objects. This is un-necessary complexity for me. So I'm - 0 on this.
> What do others think?
>
You can easily prevent users from changing the kubernetesGroupId. You check
whether the given host is in the given group. If not, you simply throw an
exception.
>
> Thanks
>
--
Rajkumar Rajaratnam
Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> > Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
>> > instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
>> > AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed
>> only
>> > via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>>
>> +1. This is completely against the web services model. Just noticed that
>>
>> org/apache/stratos/autoscaler/client/cloud/controller/CloudControllerClient.java
>> class is creating an instance of AutoscalerImpl.
>
>
> Why do CloudControllerClient needs to call Autoscaler Service in the first
> place? Also can you point to the exact code segment?
>
We are calling to get kubernetesMasterIP and portRange. These should be set
to the MemberContext when calling startContainers() CC API.
I guess CC can call Autoscaler APIs get these?
>
>> Will have to fix
>> this. Nice finding Sajith!
>>
>> > Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
>> > Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are
>> not
>> > consistent.
>> > IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
>> its
>> > no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
>> consistency,
>> > So I would like to suggest to rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as
>> > AutoScalerService.
>> >
>> > thoughts?
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I''ll create JIRAs to track these tasks. I too think that it is
>> important to clean up this code in a proper way.
>>
>> >> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
>> returned
>> >> instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side
>> easy,
>> >> otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the
>> updated
>> >> object ?
>>
>> +1
>> Yes, that would be make things easy in client side.
>>
>>
>> >>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
>> >>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to
>> KubernetesGroup. I
>> >>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>> >>>
>> >>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>> >>>
>> >>> We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>> >>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both
>> KubernetesGroupId
>> >>> and KubernetesHost object.
>> >>> removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could see
>> >>> that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to
>> identify
>> >>> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from
>> that
>> >>> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
>> object,
>> >>> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
>> need to
>> >>> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>> >>> updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same reason as
>> >>> above.
>> >>>
>> >>> It will improve the performance.
>>
>> IMO, doing that will only add more complexity to the code. I don't see
>> a beneficial performance gain for that kind of increase in the
>> complexity.
>>
>> If we do that, then we will have to add more annotations to hide
>> kubernetesGroupId in the json object serialization. Because we do not
>> want users to change the kubernetes groupId when updating host
>> objects. This is un-necessary complexity for me. So I'm - 0 on this.
>> What do others think?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Nirmal
>
> Nirmal Fernando.
> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>
> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>
--
Rajkumar Rajaratnam
Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Hi
>
> > Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
> > instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
> > AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed only
> > via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>
> +1. This is completely against the web services model. Just noticed that
>
> org/apache/stratos/autoscaler/client/cloud/controller/CloudControllerClient.java
> class is creating an instance of AutoscalerImpl.
Why do CloudControllerClient needs to call Autoscaler Service in the first
place? Also can you point to the exact code segment?
> Will have to fix
> this. Nice finding Sajith!
>
> > Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
> > Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are
> not
> > consistent.
> > IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
> its
> > no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
> consistency,
> > So I would like to suggest to rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as
> > AutoScalerService.
> >
> > thoughts?
>
> +1
>
> I''ll create JIRAs to track these tasks. I too think that it is
> important to clean up this code in a proper way.
>
> >> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
> returned
> >> instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side
> easy,
> >> otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the updated
> >> object ?
>
> +1
> Yes, that would be make things easy in client side.
>
>
> >>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
> >>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to
> KubernetesGroup. I
> >>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
> >>>
> >>> There are some advantages of doing this.
> >>>
> >>> We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
> >>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both
> KubernetesGroupId
> >>> and KubernetesHost object.
> >>> removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could see
> >>> that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
> >>> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from
> that
> >>> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
> object,
> >>> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
> need to
> >>> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
> >>> updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same reason as
> >>> above.
> >>>
> >>> It will improve the performance.
>
> IMO, doing that will only add more complexity to the code. I don't see
> a beneficial performance gain for that kind of increase in the
> complexity.
>
> If we do that, then we will have to add more annotations to hide
> kubernetesGroupId in the json object serialization. Because we do not
> want users to change the kubernetes groupId when updating host
> objects. This is un-necessary complexity for me. So I'm - 0 on this.
> What do others think?
>
> Thanks
>
--
Best Regards,
Nirmal
Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Hi
>
> > Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
> > instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
> > AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed only
> > via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
>
> +1. This is completely against the web services model. Just noticed that
>
> org/apache/stratos/autoscaler/client/cloud/controller/CloudControllerClient.java
> class is creating an instance of AutoscalerImpl. Will have to fix
> this. Nice finding Sajith!
>
> > Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
> > Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are
> not
> > consistent.
> > IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface,
> its
> > no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the
> consistency,
> > So I would like to suggest to rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as
> > AutoScalerService.
> >
> > thoughts?
>
> +1
>
+1.
>
> I''ll create JIRAs to track these tasks. I too think that it is
> important to clean up this code in a proper way.
>
> >> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is
> returned
> >> instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side
> easy,
> >> otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the updated
> >> object ?
>
> +1
> Yes, that would be make things easy in client side.
>
>
IMO we shouldn't do this if it is not necessary (since this would add some
performance impact, when writing the response to the wire.). Even in Google
Kubernetes API
http://cdn.rawgit.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/kubernetes/31a0daae3627c91bc96e1f02a6344cd76e294791/api/kubernetes.html,
it's void for a POST.
> >>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
> >>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to
> KubernetesGroup. I
> >>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
> >>>
> >>> There are some advantages of doing this.
> >>>
> >>> We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
> >>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both
> KubernetesGroupId
> >>> and KubernetesHost object.
> >>> removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could see
> >>> that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
> >>> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from
> that
> >>> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost
> object,
> >>> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we
> need to
> >>> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
> >>> updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same reason as
> >>> above.
> >>>
> >>> It will improve the performance.
>
> IMO, doing that will only add more complexity to the code. I don't see
> a beneficial performance gain for that kind of increase in the
> complexity.
>
> If we do that, then we will have to add more annotations to hide
> kubernetesGroupId in the json object serialization. Because we do not
> want users to change the kubernetes groupId when updating host
> objects. This is un-necessary complexity for me. So I'm - 0 on this.
> What do others think?
>
> Thanks
>
--
Best Regards,
Nirmal
Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>.
Hi
> Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
> instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
> AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed only
> via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
+1. This is completely against the web services model. Just noticed that
org/apache/stratos/autoscaler/client/cloud/controller/CloudControllerClient.java
class is creating an instance of AutoscalerImpl. Will have to fix
this. Nice finding Sajith!
> Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
> Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
> consistent.
> IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface, its
> no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the consistency,
> So I would like to suggest to rename AutoScalerServiceInterface as
> AutoScalerService.
>
> thoughts?
+1
I''ll create JIRAs to track these tasks. I too think that it is
important to clean up this code in a proper way.
>> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is returned
>> instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side easy,
>> otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the updated
>> object ?
+1
Yes, that would be make things easy in client side.
>>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
>>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
>>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>>>
>>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>>
>>> We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>>> and KubernetesHost object.
>>> removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could see
>>> that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
>>> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from that
>>> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost object,
>>> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we need to
>>> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>>> updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same reason as
>>> above.
>>>
>>> It will improve the performance.
IMO, doing that will only add more complexity to the code. I don't see
a beneficial performance gain for that kind of increase in the
complexity.
If we do that, then we will have to add more annotations to hide
kubernetesGroupId in the json object serialization. Because we do not
want users to change the kubernetes groupId when updating host
objects. This is un-necessary complexity for me. So I'm - 0 on this.
What do others think?
Thanks
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>.
Found that some of the AutoscalerImpl operations are invoked by directly
instantiating the AutoscalerImpl. I think this is not good.
AutoscalerImpl meant to be a web service, which needs to be accessed only
via service stubs, referring to the WSDL.
Another small thing to be highlight, regarding the interface naming.
Currently Autoscaler service's interface and CC 's interface naming are not
consistent.
IMO the part 'interface' should not be go in the name of the interface, its
no hard and fast rule, but I think its better to maintain the consistency,
So I would like to suggest to rename AutoScalerServiceInterface
as AutoScalerService.
thoughts?
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com> wrote:
> +1 for Raj's suggestion.
>
> Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is returned
> instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side easy,
> otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the updated
> object ?
>
> Thanks,
> Sajith
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
>> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
>> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>>
>> There are some advantages of doing this.
>>
>> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
>> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
>> and KubernetesHost object.
>> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could
>> see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
>> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from that
>> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost object,
>> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we need to
>> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
>> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same
>> reason as above.
>>
>> It will improve the performance.
>>
>> wdyt?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Nirmal,
>>>
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>> >>
>>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>>
>>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
>>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>>
>>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>>> groupId in the request path.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>>> >>
>>> >> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>>> technical
>>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful
>>> >> >> design
>>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> For eg -
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the
>>> >> >> naming
>>> >> >> consistent?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > +1
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Best Regards,
>>> >> > Nirmal
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>> >>
>>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Best Regards,
>>> > Nirmal
>>> >
>>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>> >
>>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>
>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
>> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
>> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Sajith Kariyawasam*
>
>
> *Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
> <http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
>
--
*Sajith Kariyawasam*
*Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
<http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Sajith Kariyawasam <sa...@wso2.com>.
+1 for Raj's suggestion.
Also, how about in "updateX" operations if the updated object is returned
instead of the boolean? That will make the programming in client side easy,
otherwise it will need to do another "getX" call to retrieve the updated
object ?
Thanks,
Sajith
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
> ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
> mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
>
> There are some advantages of doing this.
>
> 1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
> addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
> and KubernetesHost object.
> 2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could
> see that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
> which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from that
> group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost object,
> then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we need to
> pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
> 3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same reason
> as above.
>
> It will improve the performance.
>
> wdyt?
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nirmal,
>>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
>> >>
>> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>> >
>> >
>> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>>
>> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
>> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
>> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>>
>> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
>> groupId in the request path.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>> >> StackOverflow [1].
>> >>
>> >> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
>> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
>> technical
>> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful
>> >> >> design
>> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> For eg -
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > These should be POST IMO.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the
>> >> >> naming
>> >> >> consistent?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > +1
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Best Regards,
>> >> > Nirmal
>> >> >
>> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
>> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>> >> >
>> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
>> >>
>> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Nirmal
>> >
>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>> >
>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>
>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Rajkumar Rajaratnam
> Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
> Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
>
--
*Sajith Kariyawasam*
*Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
<http://wso2.com>AMIE (SL)Mobile: +94772269575*
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Rajkumar Rajaratnam <ra...@wso2.com>.
Hi,
One KubernetesHost is associated with only one KubernetesGroup. Hence
ideally KubernetesHost class should have a reference to KubernetesGroup. I
mean KubernetesHost should have a KubernetesGroupId filed.
There are some advantages of doing this.
1. We need to pass only KubernetesHost object when calling
addKubernetesHost() method. Currently we are passing both KubernetesGroupId
and KubernetesHost object.
2. removeKubernetesHost() method will become more efficient. I could see
that you are looping through all Kubernetes Groups in-order to identify
which Group has the given host. Then you are removing the host from that
group. If you store the KubernetesGroupId in the KubernetesHost object,
then no need to loop through all the KubernetesGroups. Of course we need to
pass the KubernetesHost object to the removeKubernetesHost() method.
3. updateKubernetesHost() would work faster because of the same reason
as above.
It will improve the performance.
wdyt?
Thanks.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Hi Nirmal,
>
> >>
> >> Thanks for bringing that up.
> >>
> >> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
> >
> >
> > Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
>
> When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
> the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
> KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
>
> But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
> groupId in the request path.
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
> >> StackOverflow [1].
> >>
> >> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <
> nirmal070125@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
> >> > <ra...@wso2.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the
> technical
> >> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
> >> >>
> >> >> Here are the meeting notes;
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful
> >> >> design
> >> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
> >> >>
> >> >> For eg -
> >> >>
> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
> >> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > These should be POST IMO.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the
> >> >> naming
> >> >> consistent?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > +1
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best Regards,
> >> > Nirmal
> >> >
> >> > Nirmal Fernando.
> >> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> >> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
> >> >
> >> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Akila Ravihansa Perera
> >> Software Engineer, WSO2
> >>
> >> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Nirmal
> >
> > Nirmal Fernando.
> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
> >
> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> --
> Akila Ravihansa Perera
> Software Engineer, WSO2
>
> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>
--
Rajkumar Rajaratnam
Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc.
Mobile +94777568639 | +94783498120
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>.
Hi Nirmal,
>>
>> Thanks for bringing that up.
>>
>> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>
>
> Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
When deploying a new KubernetesGroup we are specifying the groupId in
the request body itself. We are basically serializing the
KubernetesGroup object which contains the groupId field.
But when deploying a Kubernetes host, we are passing Kubernetes
groupId in the request path.
>
>>
>> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
>> StackOverflow [1].
>>
>> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera
>> > <ra...@wso2.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the technical
>> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>> >>
>> >> Here are the meeting notes;
>> >>
>> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful
>> >> design
>> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>> >>
>> >> For eg -
>> >>
>> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>> >
>> >
>> > These should be POST IMO.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>> >>
>> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the
>> >> naming
>> >> consistent?
>> >
>> >
>> > +1
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Nirmal
>> >
>> > Nirmal Fernando.
>> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>> >
>> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>
>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Nirmal
>
> Nirmal Fernando.
> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>
> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
--
Akila Ravihansa Perera
Software Engineer, WSO2
Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Hi Nirmal,
>
> Thanks for bringing that up.
>
> Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
>
Are we adding it in request body or in the request path?
> shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
> StackOverflow [1].
>
> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
> ravihansa@wso2.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the technical
> >> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
> >>
> >> Here are the meeting notes;
> >>
> >> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful
> design
> >> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
> >>
> >> For eg -
> >>
> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
> >>
> >>
> >> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
> >> PUT /kubernetes/group/
> >
> >
> > These should be POST IMO.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
> >>
> >>
> >> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
> >>
> >> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the
> naming
> >> consistent?
> >
> >
> > +1
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Nirmal
> >
> > Nirmal Fernando.
> > PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> > Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
> >
> > Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> --
> Akila Ravihansa Perera
> Software Engineer, WSO2
>
> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>
--
Best Regards,
Nirmal
Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>.
Hi Nirmal,
Thanks for bringing that up.
Since Kubernetes Group ID is given in the request body itself,
shouldn't we make it PUT? Here is a good discussion about this on
StackOverflow [1].
[1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/630453/put-vs-post-in-rest
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the technical
>> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>>
>> Here are the meeting notes;
>>
>> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful design
>> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>>
>> For eg -
>>
>> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
>> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>>
>>
>> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
>> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>
>
> These should be POST IMO.
>>
>>
>> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>>
>>
>> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>>
>> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the naming
>> consistent?
>
>
> +1
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Nirmal
>
> Nirmal Fernando.
> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>
> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
--
Akila Ravihansa Perera
Software Engineer, WSO2
Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the technical
> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>
> Here are the meeting notes;
>
> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful design
> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>
> For eg -
>
> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>
> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>
These should be POST IMO.
>
> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>
>
> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>
> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the naming
> consistent?
>
+1
>
>
> Thanks.
>
--
Best Regards,
Nirmal
Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Lahiru Sandaruwan <la...@wso2.com>.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the technical
> glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
>
> Here are the meeting notes;
>
> 1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful design
> (not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
>
> For eg -
>
> Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
> PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
>
> Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
> PUT /kubernetes/group/
>
> 2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
>
>
> Adding to that what I could not discuss:
>
> 1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the naming
> consistent?
>
Yes +1. As we discussed in earlier hangout as well, let's stick with
"KubernetesCluster" all the places.
>
>
> Thanks.
>
--
--
Lahiru Sandaruwan
Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer,
WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
lean.enterprise.middleware
email: lahirus@wso2.com cell: (+94) 773 325 954
blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/
twitter: http://twitter.com/lahirus
linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>.
Thanks everyone for joining the call. Really sorry about the technical
glitches we had to face during the Hangout.
Here are the meeting notes;
1. Clean up the REST API. Change the REST APIs to adhere to RESTful design
(not only limited to Kubernetes host registration)
For eg -
Deploying a new Kubernetes host -
PUT /kubernetes/group/{kubernetesGroupId}/host
Deploying a new Kubernetes group -
PUT /kubernetes/group/
2. Remove boolean return types in AutoScalerService interface
Adding to that what I could not discuss:
1. Shall we rename KubernetesGroup -> KubernetesCluster to make the naming
consistent?
Thanks.
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Udara Liyanage <ud...@wso2.com>.
Hi,
Last hangout was terminated since call is full. Create a new hangout .
Please join the new hangout [1].
[1]
https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/hoaevent/AP36tYdkFXKXET1eI-PuGwcqXs0GZo2Ma-znqKMiTDt9vPgbg-7MHg?authuser=0&hl=en
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ravihansa@wso2.com
> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Kind reminder.
>
> Please find the Hangout link at [1]. Slides are available at [2].
>
>
> [1]
> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/hoaevent/AP36tYeJH48x5LwfB2qSCB8Iyf_7FNrYMkOfi3xHx8kanZRbc8auGw?authuser=0&hl=en
>
> [2]
> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zTuytvNdlrDJlILDPQ2QiuSr72Rbq9-gBbsw1DQWILA/edit#slide=id.p
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> @Sajith do you have some time (<30mints) to spend with Akila and do a
>> peer review? I've to do merging stuff and testing for M1 today.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Shiroshica Kulatilake <sh...@wso2.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Has a peer review been done on this ? - If not maybe it would be
>>> worthwhile to do before the actual hangout
>>>
>>> peer review = informal session with another pair of eyes
>>>
>>> WDYT ?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Nirmal Fernando <nirmal070125@gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Shall we have the $subject tomorrow (Fri, Sep 26) at 10.30 AM GMT+5:30
>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> We will be reviewing about the new Stratos feature to register a
>>>>> Kubernetes cluster endpoint.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>>
>>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Nirmal
>>>>
>>>> Nirmal Fernando.
>>>> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>
>>>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Shiroshica Kulatilake
>>>
>>> Architect,
>>> WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com/
>>> Phone: +94 776523867
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Thanks & regards,
>> Nirmal
>>
>> Senior Software Engineer- Platform Technologies Team, WSO2 Inc.
>> Mobile: +94715779733
>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Akila Ravihansa Perera
> Software Engineer, WSO2
>
> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>
--
Udara Liyanage
Software Engineer
WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
lean. enterprise. middleware
web: http://udaraliyanage.wordpress.com
phone: +94 71 443 6897
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>.
Hi all,
Kind reminder.
Please find the Hangout link at [1]. Slides are available at [2].
[1]
https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/hoaevent/AP36tYeJH48x5LwfB2qSCB8Iyf_7FNrYMkOfi3xHx8kanZRbc8auGw?authuser=0&hl=en
[2]
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zTuytvNdlrDJlILDPQ2QiuSr72Rbq9-gBbsw1DQWILA/edit#slide=id.p
Thanks.
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@wso2.com> wrote:
> @Sajith do you have some time (<30mints) to spend with Akila and do a peer
> review? I've to do merging stuff and testing for M1 today.
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Shiroshica Kulatilake <sh...@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Has a peer review been done on this ? - If not maybe it would be
>> worthwhile to do before the actual hangout
>>
>> peer review = informal session with another pair of eyes
>>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <
>>> ravihansa@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Shall we have the $subject tomorrow (Fri, Sep 26) at 10.30 AM GMT+5:30 ?
>>>>
>>>> We will be reviewing about the new Stratos feature to register a
>>>> Kubernetes cluster endpoint.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Akila Ravihansa Perera
>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2
>>>>
>>>> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Nirmal
>>>
>>> Nirmal Fernando.
>>> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>
>>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Shiroshica Kulatilake
>>
>> Architect,
>> WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com/
>> Phone: +94 776523867
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Thanks & regards,
> Nirmal
>
> Senior Software Engineer- Platform Technologies Team, WSO2 Inc.
> Mobile: +94715779733
> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
--
Akila Ravihansa Perera
Software Engineer, WSO2
Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
Re: [Hangout] Design and Code review - Kubernetes Host Registration
Posted by Nirmal Fernando <ni...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ra...@wso2.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Shall we have the $subject tomorrow (Fri, Sep 26) at 10.30 AM GMT+5:30 ?
>
> We will be reviewing about the new Stratos feature to register a
> Kubernetes cluster endpoint.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Akila Ravihansa Perera
> Software Engineer, WSO2
>
> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>
--
Best Regards,
Nirmal
Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/