api-ref: document caveats with scheduler hints
I noticed this while working on change I49ffebcd129990f1835f404d98b51732a32171eb and I realized the scheduler_hints in the legacy filter_properties dict is a bit different than what's in the RequestSpec object, namely that the request validation schema is per-hint. Some require a single value, like 'group', and some accept a list of values, like 'different_host'. Given how nebulous scheduler hints are, we should probably note these in the API reference for the parameter, especially because scheduler hints should not be considered interoperable. Change-Id: I74114fc56bee2bebf4a5f5d6823ec968cad9a8e9
This commit is contained in:
parent
5c07356526
commit
a6fcfb28ae
@ -4436,7 +4436,19 @@ os-stop:
|
||||
os:scheduler_hints:
|
||||
description: |
|
||||
The dictionary of data to send to the scheduler. Alternatively, you can specify
|
||||
``OS-SCH-HNT:scheduler_hints`` as the string.
|
||||
``OS-SCH-HNT:scheduler_hints`` as the key in the request body.
|
||||
|
||||
There are a few caveats with scheduler hints:
|
||||
|
||||
* The request validation schema is per hint. For example, some require a
|
||||
single string value, and some accept a list of values.
|
||||
* Hints are only used based on the cloud scheduler configuration, which
|
||||
varies per deployment.
|
||||
* Hints are pluggable per deployment, meaning that a cloud can have custom
|
||||
hints which may not be available in another cloud.
|
||||
|
||||
For these reasons, it is important to consult each cloud's user
|
||||
documentation to know what is available for scheduler hints.
|
||||
in: body
|
||||
required: false
|
||||
type: object
|
||||
|
@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ _hints = {
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
'same_host': {
|
||||
# NOTE: The value of 'different_host' is the set of server
|
||||
# NOTE: The value of 'same_host' is the set of server
|
||||
# uuids where a new server is scheduled on the same host.
|
||||
'type': ['string', 'array'],
|
||||
'items': parameter_types.server_id
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user