[Starlingx-discuss] Improve FM's Python API return data

[Lin, Shuicheng]

Hi all,
Based on the comments in patch [0], I will add two new API, get_fault_ex and get_faults_by_id_ex.
I will not add a new class, since all other APIs are kept without change.
For get_fault_ex and get_faults_by_id_ex:
the return value will be alarm list (maybe None).
Exception will be thrown if there is error during API execution.


[0]: https://review.openstack.org/637655


Best Regards
Shuicheng

From: Lin, Shuicheng [mailto:shuicheng.lin at intel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 10:41 AM
To: MacDonald, Eric <Eric.MacDonald at windriver.com>; Liu, Tao <Tao.Liu at windriver.com>; Al.Bailey at windriver.com
Cc: Xie, Cindy <cindy.xie at intel.com>; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Improve FM's Python API return data

Hi Eric,
Thanks for the detail comments.
In my plan, the return value for get_fault API will be like below:
(False, None): there is error in the API execution.
(True, None): API execution correctly, and there is no alarm message.
(True, Alarm): API execution correctly, and there is alarm message.

I think it should fix the issue you have. Is it right?
If you agree on this new API return value change, I will implement it.
Thanks.

Best Regards
Shuicheng

From: MacDonald, Eric [mailto:Eric.MacDonald at windriver.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 10:35 PM
To: Lin, Shuicheng <shuicheng.lin at intel.com<mailto:shuicheng.lin at intel.com>>; Liu, Tao <Tao.Liu at windriver.com<mailto:Tao.Liu at windriver.com>>
Cc: Xie, Cindy <cindy.xie at intel.com<mailto:cindy.xie at intel.com>>
Subject: RE: Improve FM's Python API return data

I took a look and added comments. I don't think this update fixes the issue I have.

From: Lin, Shuicheng [mailto:shuicheng.lin at intel.com]
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 10:09 PM
To: MacDonald, Eric; Liu, Tao
Cc: Xie, Cindy
Subject: RE: Improve FM's Python API return data
Importance: High

Resend the mail.

Best Regards
Shuicheng

From: Lin, Shuicheng
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 9:56 AM
To: Liu, Tao (Wind River) <tao.liu at windriver.com<mailto:tao.liu at windriver.com>>; 'eric.macdonald at windriver.com' <eric.macdonald at windriver.com<mailto:eric.macdonald at windriver.com>>
Cc: Xie, Cindy <cindy.xie at intel.com<mailto:cindy.xie at intel.com>>
Subject: Improve FM's Python API return data

Hi Tao/Eric,
For story 2004859<https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2004859>, I plan to modify the get_fault api return value as a tuple.
(True/False, Alarm)
Alarm is valid only when the 1st item is True.

Sample code is uploaded for you early review:
Stx-fault: https://review.openstack.org/637655
Stx-integ: https://review.openstack.org/637656
Could you help review it and share your thought?
If you agree on it, I will implement the code and test it.

For test, I will try to kill fmManager/modify its listening port to simulate the failure case.
For the api call outside of stx-fault, I may try to call it manually to verify.
Please share me if there is better verify method.
Thanks.


Best Regards
Shuicheng

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/attachments/20190225/b8932486/attachment.html>