On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 13:10 -0800, Mark Washenberger wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Henry Nash > <hen...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > Hi Mark, > > > So we would not modify any existing IDs, so no migration > required. > > > Okay, I just want to be painfully clear--we're not proposing changing > any of the current restrictions on the user-id field. We will not: > - require it to be a uuid > - encode it as binary instead of char > - shrink its size below the current 64 characters
The first would be required for the real solution. The second and third are performance improvements. > Any of those could require a migration for existing IDs depending on > how your identity driver functions. Personally, I think to fix this issue permanently and properly, migrations for database schemas of Glance and Nova would indeed need to accompany a proposed patch that restricts the Keystone external user ID to only a UUID value. I entirely disagree with allowing non-UUID values for the user ID value that is exposed outside of Keystone. All other solutions (including the proposals to continue using the user_id fields with non-UUID values) are just hacks IMO. Best, -jay _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev