Open Stack

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.