[Pulp-dev] Pagination Requirements and Defaults?
dkliban at redhat.com
Tue Aug 20 18:34:43 UTC 2019
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 1:06 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:
> #3801 only describes the move from CursorPagination to
> PageNumberPagination. I don't think we considered
> using LimitOffsetPagination.
> That's right David. The CursorPagination was picked randomly when we were
implementing the initial base classes for Pulp 3. It was part of this
I am interested in users such as Katello providing feedback on whether or
not they could switch to using the LimitOffsetPagination.
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 1:01 PM Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:17 PM Brian Bouterse <bmbouter at redhat.com>
>>> Recently with pulp_ansible, users were interested in using pagination
>>> with LimitOffsetPagination . Pulp currently defaults to
>>> PageNumberPagination. I looked at our current DRF defaults, and I noticed
>>> two things.
>>> 1. We default to the not-as-common PageNumberPagination based on
>>> examples in the drf docs.
>>> 2. We customize it here  in various ways.
>>> Can someone help me remember why these pagination style choices were
>>> made or where the requirements came from?
>> I believe the motivation is described here:
>>> Would our bindings work with a LimitOffsetPagination style?
>> Yes, the bindings will work with anything that uses query parameters for
>>> What use cases drove the use and customization in this area?
>>> Also, @katello how would a pagination style change (like switching to
>>> LimitOffsetPagination) affect you?
>>> Thanks for any info you can provide. Maybe what we have right now is
>>> just what we need, but I'm not sure.
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pulp-dev