Open Stack

+1,

 

I am fan of checking the constraints in the controller level instead of relying on FK constraints itself, thanks.

 

 

Best Regards,

Dave Chen

 

From: Morgan Fainberg [mailto:morgan.fainberg at gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 2:29 AM
To: David Stanek; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone]ON DELETE RESTRICT VS ON DELETE CASCADE

 

On March 8, 2015 at 11:24:37 AM, David Stanek (dstanek at dstanek.com) wrote:


On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Mike Bayer <mbayer at redhat.com> wrote:

can you elaborate on your reasoning that FK constraints should be used less
overall?  or do you just mean that the client side should be mirroring the same
rules that would be enforced by the FKs?


I don't think he means that we will use them less.  Our SQL backends are full of them.  What Keystone can't do is rely on them because not all implementations of our backends support FKs.

100% spot on David. We support implementations that have no real concept of FK and we cannot assume that a cascade (or restrict) will occur on these implementations.

 

—Morga

 

--

David
blog: http://www.traceback.org
twitter: http://twitter.com/dstanek

www: http://dstanek.com

__________________________________________________________________________ 
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe 
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150309/1fa16fda/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6648 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150309/1fa16fda/attachment.bin>