You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cloudstack.apache.org by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> on 2017/12/28 09:52:37 UTC
[DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it
break your integration
All,
We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your
integration
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
+1 for this change as far as I am concerned, seems a good one.
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rohit Yadav" <ro...@shapeblue.com>
> To: "dev" <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>, "users" <us...@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, 28 December, 2017 09:52:37
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure
> if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms
> etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external
> billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than
> events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your
integration
Posted by Venkata Yedugundla <ve...@accelerite.com>.
Hi all,
We need to go with api versioning at some point. However, it may not be right to park this till we get api versioning done. Even if we add a global configuration, at some point the dependent apps need to work with uuids and its again some more work is needed on this. Instead let the dependent apps (if there are not too many) plan to work with uuid before 4.12 (may be they can continue using the id based on type of data) and we can give the heads up about the same in the documentation of 4.11.
Thanks,
Subhash
________________________________
From: Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>
Sent: 01 January 2018 16:12:28
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
(not voting, but) +1 to the general idea of API versioning as a separate initiative.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
[https://cloudstack.apache.org/images/monkey-144.png]<https://cloudstack.apache.org/>
Apache CloudStack: Open Source Cloud Computing<https://cloudstack.apache.org/>
cloudstack.apache.org
CloudStack is open source cloud computing software for creating, managing, and deploying infrastructure cloud services
________________________________
From: Rene Moser <ma...@renemoser.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2017 9:37:18 PM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Hi
On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
René
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
[http://www.shapeblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/logo.png]<http://www.shapeblue.com/>
Shapeblue - The CloudStack Company<http://www.shapeblue.com/>
www.shapeblue.com
Rapid deployment framework for Apache CloudStack IaaS Clouds. CSForge is a framework developed by ShapeBlue to deliver the rapid deployment of a standardised ...
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
DISCLAIMER
==========
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could
it break your integration
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
(not voting, but) +1 to the general idea of API versioning as a separate initiative.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
________________________________
From: Rene Moser <ma...@renemoser.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2017 9:37:18 PM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Hi
On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
René
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Posted by Khosrow Moossavi <km...@cloudops.com>.
+1 on API versioning and make it really RESTful (cherry on top).
I'm willing to participate on this change if voted for.
Khosrow Moossavi
CloudOps
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Rene Moser <ma...@renemoser.net> wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > All,
> >
> >
> > We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not
> sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as
> billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding
> is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related
> tables for data than events table.
> >
> >
> > The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
> >
> >
> > Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
> Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
> the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
>
> René
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could
it break your integration
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
(not voting, but) +1 to the general idea of API versioning as a separate initiative.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
________________________________
From: Rene Moser <ma...@renemoser.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2017 9:37:18 PM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Hi
On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
René
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Posted by Khosrow Moossavi <km...@cloudops.com>.
+1 on API versioning and make it really RESTful (cherry on top).
I'm willing to participate on this change if voted for.
Khosrow Moossavi
CloudOps
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Rene Moser <ma...@renemoser.net> wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > All,
> >
> >
> > We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not
> sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as
> billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding
> is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related
> tables for data than events table.
> >
> >
> > The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
> >
> >
> > Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
> Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
> the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
>
> René
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your
integration
Posted by Rene Moser <ma...@renemoser.net>.
Hi
On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
René
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could
it break your integration
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
Hi Michael,
Thanks for sharing, can you confirm if Ubersmith consumes the list of events rather than consume from the cloud_usage.cloud_usage and related tables?
Once you and possibly other users can confirm we can keep the PR off the next release to work with everyone and avoid breaking billing and other integrations, but a refactoring of exporting UUIDs instead of IDs is inevitable in future releases.
As a project, we can't guarantee backward compatibilities on the event description/subject as we've seen minor changes to the text in the past PRs. It is therefore advised that external integrations and tools/vendors should consume from cloud_usage and related tables and not event description tables/lists for processing billings. Thanks.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
________________________________
From: Michael J McCafferty <mi...@m5hosting.com>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2017 2:28:52 AM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Hi Rohit,
This will break billing for us. We use Ubersmith.
If this change is made, please make it optional (global setting for old and new way) or allow for different API versions either by option or path that is called.
Thanks!
Mike
******************************************************************
Michael J. McCafferty
CEO
M5 Hosting, Inc.
http://www.m5hosting.com <http://www.m5hosting.com/>
Inc. 5000 America’s Fastest Growing Companies, 2017
******************************************************************
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
> On Dec 28, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could
it break your integration
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
Hi Michael,
Thanks for sharing, can you confirm if Ubersmith consumes the list of events rather than consume from the cloud_usage.cloud_usage and related tables?
Once you and possibly other users can confirm we can keep the PR off the next release to work with everyone and avoid breaking billing and other integrations, but a refactoring of exporting UUIDs instead of IDs is inevitable in future releases.
As a project, we can't guarantee backward compatibilities on the event description/subject as we've seen minor changes to the text in the past PRs. It is therefore advised that external integrations and tools/vendors should consume from cloud_usage and related tables and not event description tables/lists for processing billings. Thanks.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
________________________________
From: Michael J McCafferty <mi...@m5hosting.com>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2017 2:28:52 AM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Hi Rohit,
This will break billing for us. We use Ubersmith.
If this change is made, please make it optional (global setting for old and new way) or allow for different API versions either by option or path that is called.
Thanks!
Mike
******************************************************************
Michael J. McCafferty
CEO
M5 Hosting, Inc.
http://www.m5hosting.com <http://www.m5hosting.com/>
Inc. 5000 America’s Fastest Growing Companies, 2017
******************************************************************
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
> On Dec 28, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
Posted by Michael J McCafferty <mi...@m5hosting.com>.
Hi Rohit,
This will break billing for us. We use Ubersmith.
If this change is made, please make it optional (global setting for old and new way) or allow for different API versions either by option or path that is called.
Thanks!
Mike
******************************************************************
Michael J. McCafferty
CEO
M5 Hosting, Inc.
http://www.m5hosting.com <http://www.m5hosting.com/>
Inc. 5000 America’s Fastest Growing Companies, 2017
******************************************************************
> On Dec 28, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your
integration
Posted by Rene Moser <ma...@renemoser.net>.
Hi
On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
René
Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your
integration
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
+1 for this change as far as I am concerned, seems a good one.
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rohit Yadav" <ro...@shapeblue.com>
> To: "dev" <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>, "users" <us...@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, 28 December, 2017 09:52:37
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure
> if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms
> etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external
> billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than
> events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue