2011/11/29 Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com>: > There's a very good reason this hasn't happened so far: handling > highly relational datasets with a non-relational data store is a bad > idea. In fact, I seem to remember that is exactly how Nova's data > store started out life (*cough* Redis *cough*)
To be fair, we're only barely making use of this in our DB implementation. I don't think we do any foreign key checking at all, and deletes (because we don't actually delete anything, we just mark it as deleted) don't cascade, so there are all sort of ways in which our data store could be inconsistent. Besides, we don't really use transactions. I could easily read the same data from two separate nodes, make different (irreconcilable) changes on both nodes, and write them back, and the last one to write simply wins. In short, it seems to me we're not really getting much out of having a relational data store? -- Soren Hansen | http://linux2go.dk/ Ubuntu Developer | http://www.ubuntu.com/ OpenStack Developer | http://www.openstack.org/ _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
