rados_ioctx_t seems to describe this object pretty well... I would lean away from rados_handle_t because it's too generic sounding and could be confused with the cluster_t. C. On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub <yehudasa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, Colin Patrick McCabe wrote: >>> Another idea: pool_t -> pool_context_t, PoolHandle -> PoolContext >> >> I prefer rados_ioctx_t or rados_handle_t.. putting pool in the name is >> what is confusing (for me). Which pool you're using is just one (of >> potentially many) pieces of context/state associated with the handle. >> > > Yeah. I'd also rename the rados_pool_open()/close() to something else, > e.g., rados_open() and rados_close() or rados_x_open() and > rados_x_close() where x is not pool. > > Yehuda > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
