-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
Use format: arm-id in Redis and RedisEnterprise where appropriate #25517
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -1700,6 +1700,14 @@ | |
"properties": { | ||
"id": { | ||
"type": "string", | ||
"format": "arm-id", | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think we need to also add make changes in "ForceUnlinkParameters" properties, since it also have array of redis databases There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We should I think add this attribute whenever we use arm-id for databases ARM ID. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Added the |
||
"x-ms-arm-id-details": { | ||
"allowedResources": [ | ||
{ | ||
"type": "Microsoft.Cache/redisEnterprise/databases" | ||
} | ||
] | ||
}, | ||
"x-ms-mutability": [ | ||
"read", | ||
"create" | ||
|
@@ -1833,7 +1841,15 @@ | |
"ids": { | ||
"type": "array", | ||
"items": { | ||
"type": "string" | ||
"type": "string", | ||
"format": "arm-id", | ||
"x-ms-arm-id-details": { | ||
"allowedResources": [ | ||
{ | ||
"type": "Microsoft.Cache/redisEnterprise/databases" | ||
} | ||
] | ||
} | ||
}, | ||
"description": "The resource IDs of the database resources to be unlinked." | ||
} | ||
|
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nonblocking question since from conservatism point of view its fine...
Is ClassicNetwork still supported? I think the plan is to deprecate it soon?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure, but I don't think it hurts to have it here as all this is really saying is that "we would accept ClassicNetwork if you give it to us" - even if you can't make new ones maybe legacy existing ones are still allowed for a while?
Agree that it might be nice to be able to remove this once it really is deprecated, though not sure how to actually accomplish that in practice when the time comes.