[cinder] need comments TODAY about DB handling for default_types
On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 10:25 -0400, Brian Rosmaita wrote:
> There's a discussion going on about
> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737707/23 , namely about how to handle
> the new default_types table. My view is that since it simply records a
> relation between a project and a volume_type, it's not the kind of thing
> that we need to keep a history of, and entries could be hard-deleted.
for what its worth soft-delete as a feature has caused many operational issue
in nova over time so we have offten specualted that we might someday remove it.
we have not added soft delete capablieies to new db tables in recent times so
its proably a good idea to avoid defaulting to adding soft-delete support for
new tables in cinder too. im not sure if you have similary had issue with soft
delete in the past but i largely see the feature as tech debth in the code base
that really does not fit with the cloud model.
> The current patch keeps a history by introducing an additional is_active
> column. The additional complexity is worth it if we want to keep a
> history of this relation, but is not if we don't.
> Please leave your thoughts on the patch as soon as possible (i.e., in
> the next few hours) so Rajat can complete this feature.