Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Oved Ourfalli" <ovedo(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Gilad Chaplik" <gchaplik(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 1:30:43 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Gilad Chaplik" <gchaplik(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com&gt; >> Cc: devel(a)ovirt.org >> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 1:27:10 PM >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> To: "Martin Perina" <mperina(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> Cc: devel(a)ovirt.org >>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 12:39:17 PM >>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Martin Perina" <mperina(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>> To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>> Cc: devel(a)ovirt.org >>>> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:43:32 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>> To: "Barak Azulay" <bazulay(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>> Cc: devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 11:37:23 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Barak Azulay" <bazulay(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>> To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>> Cc: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 8:42:47 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 4:08:45 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>> To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>> Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 7:33:06 PM >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>> From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>>> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>>> Cc: devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 4:56:50 PM >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>>> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>>>> To: devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 3:20:18 PM >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling there is some inconsistency in using >>>>>>>>>> entity >>>>>>>>>> names >>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> DB >>>>>>>>>> scripts. >>>>>>>>>> For example, should we use Host or VDS? >>>>>>>>>> I am not talking about existing tables or columns but about >>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>> ones >>>>>>>>>> (and >>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>> stored procedures). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am quite sure I saw patches containing both approaches. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I guess that includes any recent patches around the network >>>>>>>> area. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are right >>>>>>>>> I think old should be kept until we have the time to do a >>>>>>>>> global >>>>>>>>> find/replace >>>>>>>>> of all old names. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Without enabling the "new" (or more appropriate) naming to new >>>>>>>> code >>>>>>>> we: >>>>>>>> 1. Increase the amount of 'old' code in the system (gaining >>>>>>>> more >>>>>>>> debts) >>>>>>>> 2. As a result - more work when and if global change will take >>>>>>>> affect. >>>>>>>> 3. Double the entire work flow: code + review. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That change should start at some point, and having it >>>>>>>> incrementally >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> valid approach >>>>>>>> to achieve that goal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I basically agree, but first someone (that can say that) should >>>>>>> say >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> we >>>>>>> are going to do that and allocate resources to this tasks , >>>>>>> unless >>>>>>> , >>>>>>> you >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> left in hybrid ugly condition >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Guys please post the list of Entities and let's agree on new names. >>>>> >>>>> Top 3 : >>>>> >>>>> StoragePool => DC >>>>> VdsGroup => Cluster >> >> IMO VdsGroup should be named MigrationDomain[1]. >> cluster is too general[2]. >> > > IMHO we should name it Cluster, just like it is in the UI. I think the UI name it 'racimo' in Spanish, and समूह in Hindi, and not 'Cluster', you have a point on REST though. > I wouldn't change it into MigrationDomain. > Moreover, in some cases VMs might not be able to migrate to all the hosts in > the cluster, depending on your configuration, so it isn't even true at all > times. You only re-enforcing my argument :) MigrationDomain fits better than Cluster.