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" <pc2...@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: pcar...@att.com > Q Instant Message > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Bell [mailto:tim.b...@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 <geekinu...@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@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
