HI Ben, I would like you to make the patch, if there is no counter proposal at the moment.
Thanks Krishna Mohan -----Original Message----- From: Ben Pfaff [mailto:b...@ovn.org] Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 8:46 PM To: Elluru, Krishna Mohan <elluru.kri.mo...@hpe.com> Cc: dev@openvswitch.org Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH] ovsdb: Force columns that contain weak references to be immutable. On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 10:26:37PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote: > On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 04:01:43AM +0000, Elluru, Krishna Mohan wrote: > > HI Ben, > > How does column which is weak reference and also configured as an > > Index? If it is mutable, and the corresponding UUID going away(deletion of > > record) leaves column value as NULL right? And what would be the behavior > > if the table is a Root table also? > > I am listing down, my assumptions: > > > > 1. In table X, If the column is index and a weak reference to table y, > > on table y row deletion, the index field would become NULL and since it is > > an index, constraint violation would occur and to avoid, it is expected to > > remove the row first in table X and table Y row deletion can happen in same > > txn or consequent transactions. Correct? > > Yes. > > > 2. If the table X is also a root table, and one of its column is an > > index and weak reference to table Y, on row deletion in table Y, constraint > > violation would occur, hence similar to above table X row cleanup is > > expected to happen prior to table Y row deletion. > > This sounds correct. > > > If above 2 statements is true, index with weak reference is becoming > > equivalent to strong reference. Am I correct? > > I believe that this is correct. It's not clear to me whether you'd like me to apply this patch, or whether you'd prefer for me to wait for a counterproposal. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
