Re: [Pulp-dev] Integer IDs in Pulp 3

The link you sent about bulk_create seems to indicate only that the primary key attribute on the model doesn’t get set unless you are PostgreSQL. This ticket seems to confirm this: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19527 That seems like a big caveat but not a showstopper that would prevent

Re: [Pulp-dev] Integer IDs in Pulp 3

Responses inline. On 05/23/2018 02:26 PM, David Davis wrote: > Before the release of Pulp 3.0 GA, I think it’s worth just checking in to > make sure we want to use UUIDs over integer based IDs. Changing from UUIDs > to ints would be a very easy change at this point (1-2 lines of code) but >

Re: [Pulp-dev] Integer IDs in Pulp 3

On 05/24/2018 11:22 AM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > I have a few concerns, but they all may be addressable. > > 1. URLs and security. If this integer is in the url, it is easy to guess > other urls. Hopefully, our security model won't depend on obscurity, so > maybe this isn't much of a concern.

Re: [Pulp-dev] Integer IDs in Pulp 3

I have a few concerns, but they all may be addressable. 1. URLs and security. If this integer is in the url, it is easy to guess other urls. Hopefully, our security model won't depend on obscurity, so maybe this isn't much of a concern. 2. bulk_create. Apparently, bulk_creates would work, but

Re: [Pulp-dev] Content types which are not compatible with the normal pulp workflow

On 05/17/2018 07:46 AM, Daniel Alley wrote: Some content types are not going to be compatible with the normal sync/publish/distribute Pulp workflows, and will need to be live API-only.  To what degree should Pulp accomodate these use cases? Example: Pulp makes the assumptions that A) the

Re: [Pulp-dev] is 3.0-dev branch ready to become master?

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > It sounds like there isn't much blocking this, but does that mean the devs > should go ahead with planning and making the branching changes? > > Patrick, can we plan to do this next week? > Also I want to confirm:

Re: [Pulp-dev] 'id' versus 'pulp_id' on Content

+1 to using _id, _created, and _last_updated only on MasterModel. It looks like leading underscores for field names are fine: https://stackoverflow.com/a/25509372 That will resolve this issue. Also everyone can still use .pk instead of ._id because Django automatically makes a .pk attribute on