Re: [pdm-devel] [RFC PATCH datacenter-manager 0/3] implement bulk start

From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
To: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>,
	Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion
	<pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pdm-devel] [RFC PATCH datacenter-manager 0/3] implement bulk start
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 17:15:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d0d004d7-c69a-4ee3-9aa5-d561d8885c2e@proxmox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15a36f0d-fef5-4ceb-8089-7cc84381e640@proxmox.com>

Am 30.01.25 um 09:14 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
> Sounds good to me, with one caveat. When implementing this, I would go for
> a new api call on the pve side that does this to properly separate this.
> I think otherwise the existing call would get much more complex. (but I have to
> try it first). On the pdm side I'd implement it with a fallback
> to call the "old" bulkstart api call on each node in case the new api call does
> not exist?

Yes, definitively a new API endpoint. FWIW, I started something at /cluster/
level, but that was pretty bare bones so not sure if its worth to dig up.
And I was not yet set on having a single endpoint or a per-action-type, the
latter might be slightly nicer for consistency with the node level, maybe
`/cluster/bulk-action/guest-{start,stop,migrate}`.

In the long run I'd also prefer to extend selection/filter capabillities of
these endpoints, but that's really not relevant for initial MVP.

> That way older nodes/clusters can still profit from the functionality without
> much state/logic handling on the pdm side.
> 
> We can still remove that fallback from PDM again when the PDM code is sufficiently old
> and PDM has no first release yet.

I'd not bother much with that, the minium support PVE for PDM is already pretty
much the latest, and the FAQ of the PDM Alpha announcement states that PDM and
PVE is expected to be developed in lock-step during stabilization. So if we manage
to add the cluster wide bulk action no later than PVE 8.4 in Q2 then I think it's
fine to have a hard dependency for that in PDM IMO. And adding that fallback
if there are lots of users with somewhat (!) reasonable complaints we can
still add the fallback. While I agree with your sentiment, I think we're a bit
special here in PDM, where ripping it out and thus reducing the minimum supported
version might be a bit harder to sell compared to adding a fallback later.

_______________________________________________
pdm-devel mailing list
pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdm-devel