From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Mitchell Subject: Re: rest mgmt api Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 20:45:07 -0500 Message-ID: <51130723.3030101@gmail.com> References: <5112AE17.6080605@inktank.com> <5112B43D.6070602@bmrb.wisc.edu> <5112D723.3030500@bmrb.wisc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-vc0-f182.google.com ([209.85.220.182]:40897 "EHLO mail-vc0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755964Ab3BGBpN (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2013 20:45:13 -0500 Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id fl17so1310945vcb.27 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:45:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5112D723.3030500@bmrb.wisc.edu> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Dimitri Maziuk Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > (Last I looked "?op=create&poolname=foo" was the Old Busted CGI, The New > Shiny Hotness(tm) was supposed to look like "/create/foo" -- and I never > understood how the optional parameters are supposed to work. But that's > beside the point.) They're different. One is using the path to interpret functionality; one is using query parameters. The former requires custom path parsing/interpreting code for your particular application; the latter is a very well supported/understood way of getting key/value pairs. Neither is right or wrong, they're just different. People seem to prefer the path method these days because it seems cleaner/nicer; the other thing people do is just POST the parameters instead of GETting, which lets you still use key/value parameters but not have an ugly URL. --Jeff