On 11/27/2014 04:20 PM, Michael Still wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 11/26/2014 04:24 PM, Mike Bayer wrote:
Precisely. Why is the RDBMS the thing that is used for
archival/audit logging? Why not a NoSQL store or a centralized log
facility? All that would be needed
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 11/26/2014 04:24 PM, Mike Bayer wrote:
>>>
>>> Precisely. Why is the RDBMS the thing that is used for
>>> archival/audit logging? Why not a NoSQL store or a centralized log
>>> facility? All that would be needed would be for us to standardize
On 11/26/2014 04:24 PM, Mike Bayer wrote:
Precisely. Why is the RDBMS the thing that is used for
archival/audit logging? Why not a NoSQL store or a centralized log
facility? All that would be needed would be for us to standardize
on the format of the archival record, standardize on the things to
Mike Bayer wrote:
Precisely. Why is the RDBMS the thing that is used for archival/audit logging?
Why not a NoSQL store or a centralized log facility? All that would be needed
would be for us to standardize on the format of the archival record,
standardize on the things to provide with the arch
On 11/26/2014 03:39 PM, Belmiro Moreira wrote:
Hi,
my experience is that "soft delete" is important to keep record of
deleted instances and its characteristics.
In fact in my organization we are obliged to keep these records for
several months.
However, it would be nice that after few months w
>
> Precisely. Why is the RDBMS the thing that is used for archival/audit
> logging? Why not a NoSQL store or a centralized log facility? All that would
> be needed would be for us to standardize on the format of the archival
> record, standardize on the things to provide with the archival rec
Hi,
my experience is that "soft delete" is important to keep record of deleted
instances and its characteristics.
In fact in my organization we are obliged to keep these records for several
months.
However, it would be nice that after few months we were able to purge the
DB with a nova tool.
In th
On 11/25/2014 09:34 PM, Mike Bayer wrote:
On Nov 25, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Ahmed RAHAL wrote:
Hi,
Le 2014-11-24 17:20, Michael Still a écrit :
Heya,
This is a new database, so its our big chance to get this right. So,
ideas welcome...
Some initial proposals:
- we do what we do in the current
On 11/25/2014 11:54 AM, Solly Ross wrote:
I can't comment on other projects, but Nova definitely needs the soft
delete in the main nova database. Perhaps not for every table, but
there is definitely code in the code base which uses it right now.
Search for read_deleted=True if you're curious.
J
> On Nov 25, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Ahmed RAHAL wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Le 2014-11-24 17:20, Michael Still a écrit :
>> Heya,
>>
>> This is a new database, so its our big chance to get this right. So,
>> ideas welcome...
>>
>> Some initial proposals:
>>
>> - we do what we do in the current nova datab
Hi,
Le 2014-11-24 17:20, Michael Still a écrit :
Heya,
This is a new database, so its our big chance to get this right. So,
ideas welcome...
Some initial proposals:
- we do what we do in the current nova database -- we have a deleted
column, and we set it to true when we delete the instance
> I can't comment on other projects, but Nova definitely needs the soft
> delete in the main nova database. Perhaps not for every table, but
> there is definitely code in the code base which uses it right now.
> Search for read_deleted=True if you're curious.
Just to save people a bit of time, it'
> On Nov 24, 2014, at 7:32 PM, Michael Still wrote:
>
> Interesting. I hadn't seen consistency between the two databases as
> trumping doing this less horribly, but it sounds like its more of a
> thing that I thought.
it really depends on what you need to do. if you need to get a result set of
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Mike Bayer wrote:
>
>> On Nov 24, 2014, at 5:20 PM, Michael Still wrote:
>>
>> Heya,
>>
>> Review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135644/4 proposes the addition
>> of a new database for our improved implementation of cells in Nova.
>> However, there's an outstan
> On Nov 24, 2014, at 5:20 PM, Michael Still wrote:
>
> Heya,
>
> Review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135644/4 proposes the addition
> of a new database for our improved implementation of cells in Nova.
> However, there's an outstanding question about how to handle soft
> delete of rows --
On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 09:20 +1100, Michael Still wrote:
> - we do what we do in the current nova database -- we have a deleted
> column, and we set it to true when we delete the instance.
Actually, current nova uses the
oslo.db.sqlalchemy.models.SoftDeleteMixin class, which defines the
columns 'd
Heya,
Review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135644/4 proposes the addition
of a new database for our improved implementation of cells in Nova.
However, there's an outstanding question about how to handle soft
delete of rows -- we believe that we need to soft delete for forensic
purposes.
This i
17 matches
Mail list logo
