[openstack-dev] [Neutron] UniqueConstraint for name and tenant_id in security group

Mathieu Gagné mgagne at iweb.com
Fri Dec 12 21:59:45 UTC 2014

On 2014-12-12 4:40 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> While there is a good case for the UX of unique names - it also makes orchestration via tools like puppet a heck of a lot simpler - the fact is that most OpenStack resources do not require unique names.  That being the case, why would we want security groups to deviate from this convention?
> Maybe the other ones are the broken ones?
> Honestly, any sanely usable system makes names unique inside a
> container. Like files in a directory. In this case the tenant is the
> container, which makes sense.


It makes as much sense as a filesystem accepting 2 files in the same 
folder with the same name but allows you to distinguish them by their 
inode number.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list