On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 15:38:22 +0100, Milan Zamazal wrote:
[Starting to move to the development list.]
Milan Zamazal <mzamazal(a)redhat.com> writes:
> Jiri Denemark <jdenemar(a)redhat.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:38:24 +0100, Milan Zamazal wrote:
>>>
>>> There are basically two problems:
>>>
>>> - When the job completion callback is called, I need to distinguish what
>>> kind of job was it to perform the appropriate actions. It would be
>>> easier if I knew the job type directly in the callback (no need to
>>> coordinate anything), but "external" job tracking is also
possible.
>>
>> An immediate answer would be: "don't rely on the completion callback
and
>> just check the return value of the API which started the job", but I
>> guess you want it because checking the return value is not possible when
>> the process which started the job is not running anymore as described
>> below.
>
> Well, avoiding using the completion callback is probably OK for me.
Thinking about it more, it's not very nice: I have to use the callback
to get the completed job stats (I'm not guaranteed the domain still
exists on the source host when I ask it for the stats explicitly) *and*
to track the jobs outside the callback to know whether the callback is
related to the type of domain jobs I'm going to handle.
Although not absolutely necessary, it would be much nicer if the job
type was identified in the callback.
The job completed event uses type parameters so adding a new parameter
describing the just completed job should not be a problem.
Jirka