Re: modify association provider

There's also the very rare three-way association.  From the depths of the SMI-S schema the CIM_SCSIInitiatorTargetLogicalUnitPath associates an initiator and target protocol endpoint with a storage extent.


Tim.

On 08/07/2010, at 6:28 AM, John McLaughlin wrote:

> Actually, an Association object can carry data as well (see SMI-S BasedOn and CompositeExtentBasedOn).  These objects can be retrieved with a “references()” call from either end of the association, and their CIMObjectPaths from a “referenceNames()” call.  I have not done this, but I assume you can (if your provider supports it as an Instance provider in addition to being an Association provider) simply call the “modifyInstance()” or “setProperty()” methods to modify the object. 
>  
> However, if you are not the provider developer there’s no assurance that the Association provider was created to support any or all of these features.
>  
> John
>  
>  
> 
> John McLaughlin
> iStor Networks, Inc.
> 
> From: Kirk Augustin [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:18 PM
> To: Ricardo Mendes; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: modify association provider
>  
> 
> Not sure exactly what you mean.
> And association is just an object that hold the paths of 2 other objects, so that they can be linked in a query and each found.
> The association provider copies the paths into the association instance, but does not change or effect the actual instances that it linked together, so should not be expected to call those instance providers.
> But since your provider must have the paths of each object, then it could also access and modify them if it wanted to.
> However, it would be somewhat inappropriate for an association provider to do that.
>  
> From: Ricardo Mendes <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Tue, July 6, 2010 4:15:25 PM
> Subject: modify association provider
> 
> Hi Everybody,
> 
> I have one association provider, if I modify one of it's associated
> providers trough the association provider, should the modify_instance
> of the associated provided be invoked?
> Mine isn't being invoked, which is a problem for me.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> RM
>