Open Stack

My thoughts exactly. I meant to dig into the soft-delete code to see if those changes handled resource_id differently but I got to traveling and forgot. IMO, if it universally needs doing, then it should be done in resource.Resource and be cognizant of deletion policy.
________________________________________
From: Clint Byrum [clint at fewbar.com]
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2013 11:30 PM
To: openstack-dev
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Do we need to clean up resource_id after    deletion?

Excerpts from Christopher Armstrong's message of 2013-11-01 11:34:56 -0700:
> Vijendar and I are trying to figure out if we need to set the resource_id
> of a resource to None when it's being deleted.
>
> This is done in a few resources, but not everywhere. To me it seems either
>
> a) redundant, since the resource is going to be deleted anyway (thus
> deleting the row in the DB that has the resource_id column)
> b) actively harmful to useful debuggability, since if the resource is
> soft-deleted, you'll not be able to find out what physical resource it
> represented before it's cleaned up.
>
> Is there some specific reason we should be calling resource_id_set(None) in
> a check_delete_complete method?
>

I've often wondered why some do it, and some don't.

Seems to me that it should be done not inside each resource plugin but
in the generic resource handling code.

However, I have not given this much thought. Perhaps others can provide
insight into why it has been done that way.

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev