Open Stack

And if the same mistake is done for a cinder volume or a trove database ?

Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua Harlow [mailto:harlowja at yahoo-inc.com]
> Sent: 12 March 2014 17:02
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][db][performance] Proposal: Get rid of soft deletion (step by step)
> 
> Understandable,
> 
> Humans will be humans after all.
> 
> To me if openstsck is a cloud platform then coming along with it should be best practices that come with the usage of a cloud
> platform (treat your instances as ephemeral, use configuration management, save your stuff in source control...). I have been
> preaching similar stuff at y! and getting people into the right mindset around "the cloud" is IMHO more important than making
> openstack fit peoples non-cloudy mindset.
> 
> Because once u teach a person to use the cloud right u don't need to have openstack compensate for them using it incorrectly.
> 
> Sent from my really tiny device...
> 
> > On Mar 12, 2014, at 4:45 AM, "CARVER, PAUL" <pc2929 at att.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have personally witnessed someone (honestly, not me) select "Terminate Instance" when they meant "Reboot Instance" and that
> mistake is way too easy. I'm not sure if it was a brain mistake or mere slip of the mouse, but it's enough to make people really
> nervous in a production environment. If there's one thing you can count on about human beings, it's that they'll make mistakes
> sooner or later. Any system that assumes infallible human beings as a design criteria is making an invalid assumption.
> >
> > --
> > Paul Carver
> > VO: 732-545-7377
> > Cell: 908-803-1656
> > E: pcarver at att.com
> > Q Instant Message
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Bell [mailto:Tim.Bell at cern.ch]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 15:43
> > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][db][performance] Proposal: Get rid
> > of soft deletion (step by step)
> >
> >
> > Typical cases are user error where someone accidentally deletes an item from a tenant. The image guys have a good structure
> where images become unavailable and are recoverable for a certain period of time. A regular periodic task cleans up deleted items
> after a configurable number of seconds to avoid constant database growth.
> >
> > My preference would be to follow this model universally (an archive table is a nice way to do it without disturbing production).
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> >>> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014, Mike Wilson <geekinutah at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Undeleting things is an important use case in my opinion. We do this
> >>> in our environment on a regular basis. In that light I'm not sure
> >>> that it would be appropriate just to log the deletion and git rid of
> >>> the row. I would like to see it go to an archival table where it is easily restored.
> >>
> >> I'm curious, what are you undeleting and why?
> >>
> >> JE
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev