On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 2:18 PM Ed Leafe <ed@leafe.com> wrote:
On Jan 21, 2019, at 1:55 PM, Lance Bragstad <lbragstad@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Are you referring to the system scope approach detailed on line 38, here [0]?

Yes.

> I might be misunderstanding something, but I didn't think keystone was going to iterate all available services and call clean-up APIs. I think it was just that services would be able to expose an endpoint that cleans up resources without a project scoped token (e.g., it would be system scoped [1]).
>
> [0] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/community-goal-project-deletion
> [1] https://docs.openstack.org/keystone/latest/admin/tokens-overview.html#system-scoped-tokens

It is more likely that I’m misunderstanding. Reading that etherpad, it appeared that it was indeed the goal to have project deletion in Keystone cascade to all the services, but I guess I missed line 19.

So if it isn’t Keystone calling this API on all the services, what would be the appropriate actor?

The actor could still be something like os-purge or adjutant [0]. Depending on how the implementation shakes out in each service, the implementation in the actor could be an interation of all services calling the same API for each one. I guess the benefit is that the actor doesn't need to manage the deletion order based on the dependencies of the resources (internal or external to a service).

Adrian, and others, have given this a bunch more thought than I have. So I'm curious to hear if what I'm saying is in line with how they've envisioned things. I'm recalling most of this from Berlin.

[0] https://adjutant.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
 


-- Ed Leafe