On Mar 23, 2011, at 8:59 PM, Eric Day wrote:
> May I ask what is the point of doing this if it won't make cactus and
> we're just going to replace it in a month or two? I think we all agree
> that 64-bit integer IDs are insufficient for multi-zone deployments,
> so no one will be deploying this until we sort it out and come up
> with a better ID.
Because this is just one part of the process of creating a distributed
scheduler. The process for selecting a host for a new instance won't depend on
the type of PK used for that instance in a db table.
The only reason I brought it up was that Sandy pointed out this
uniqueness requirement, and we felt it would be a good idea to ask the list if
they had any good ideas about alternatives to range partitions. I prefaced my
initial post with a disclaimer that I wasn't looking to re-argue things that
had already been discussed and agreed to, but I guess most people missed that
part. :)
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
