Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Mike Bayer's message of 2014-10-04 08:10:38 -0700: >> >> On Oct 4, 2014, at 1:10 AM, Kevin Benton <blak...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Does sqlalchemy have good support for cross-database foreign keys? I was >>> under the impression that they cannot be implemented with the normal syntax >>> and semantics of an intra-database foreign-key constraint. >> >> cross “database” is not typically portable, but cross “schema” is. >> >> different database vendors have different notions of “databases” or >> “schemas”. >> >> if you can get the “other database” to be accessible from the target >> database via “otherdatabase.sometable”, then you’re in. >> >> from SQLAlchemy’s perspective, it’s just a name with a dot. It’s the >> database itself that has to support the foreign key at the scope you are >> shooting for. >> > > All true, however, there are zero guarantees that databases will be > hosted on the same server, and typically permissions are setup to prevent > cross-schema joins.
I believe Group-based Policy (which this thread is about) will use the Neutron database configuration for its dependent database. If Neutron is configured for: connection = mysql://user:pass@locationX:3306/neutron then GBP would use: connection = mysql://user:pass@locationX:3306/neutron_gbp > Typically we use the public API's when we want to access data in a > different application. The database is a private implementation detail > of each application. Currently GPB is very tightly coupled to Neutron. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
