On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/26/2014 04:24 PM, Mike Bayer wrote: >>> >>> Precisely. Why is the RDBMS the thing that is used for >>> archival/audit logging? Why not a NoSQL store or a centralized log >>> facility? All that would be needed would be for us to standardize >>> on the format of the archival record, standardize on the things to >>> provide with the archival record (for instance system metadata, >>> etc), and then write a simple module that would write an archival >>> record to some backend data store. >>> >>> Then we could rid ourselves of the awfulness of the shadow tables >>> and all of the read_deleted=yes crap. >> >> >> >> +1000 - if we’re really looking to “do this right”, as the original >> message suggested, this would be “right”. If you don’t need these >> rows in the app (and it would be very nice if you didn’t), dump it >> out to an archive file / non-relational datastore. As mentioned >> elsewhere, this is entirely acceptable for organizations that are >> “obliged” to store records for auditing purposes. Nova even already >> has a dictionary format for everything set up with nova objects, so >> dumping these dictionaries out as JSON would be the way to go. > > > OK, spec added: > > https://review.openstack.org/137669
At this point I don't think we should block the cells reworking effort on this spec. I'm happy for people to pursue this, but I think its unlikely to be work that is completed in kilo. We can transition the new cells databases at the same time we fix the main database. Michael _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
