[ovs-dev] [PATCH 0/4] RFC: database backed logging console

[Thomas Graf]

On 11/29/2012 05:53 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> This is different from the approach that we discussed earlier in the
> "ovs-vsctl: check if the device name is valid" thread in late October
> and early November.  Here's what I wrote at the time:
>
>> Stepping back: I support your basic proposal, that "ovs-vsctl
>> add-port" should report a problem if the port cannot successfully be
>> added.  The issue is that, so far, the approaches I've seen don't fit
>> well with the overall Open vSwitch design.  Here is another approach
>> that fits better: make "ovs-vsctl add-port" check the value that
>> ovs-vswitchd assigns to the "ofport" column in the new Interface
>> record.  When a port is added successfully, this column receives a
>> positive integer value; when adding a port fails, it receives the
>> value -1.  I'd accept a patch to do this.
>
> I still think that's a good approach, probably better than the approach
> in this series of patches.  What's the reason for this change of
> approach?

The posted patch series resolves the problem of lack of feedback in
a much more generic way that works for all commands that change the
database. I don't see why I should be putting a add-port specific check
into ovs-vsctl when I can resolve the problem on a much higher level.

You say your original idea is "probably better". Can you be specific?
What is better about it?