On March 8, 2015 at 11:24:37 AM, David Stanek (dsta...@dstanek.com) wrote: On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Mike Bayer <mba...@redhat.com> wrote: can you elaborate on your reasoning that FK constraints should be used less overall? or do you just mean that the client side should be mirroring the same rules that would be enforced by the FKs?
I don't think he means that we will use them less. Our SQL backends are full of them. What Keystone can't do is rely on them because not all implementations of our backends support FKs. 100% spot on David. We support implementations that have no real concept of FK and we cannot assume that a cascade (or restrict) will occur on these implementations. —Morga -- David blog: http://www.traceback.org twitter: http://twitter.com/dstanek www: http://dstanek.com __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
