[openstack-dev] [Heat] Do we need to clean up resource_id after deletion?
randall.burt at RACKSPACE.COM
Sun Nov 3 03:49:52 UTC 2013
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
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
More information about the OpenStack-dev