This email thread relates to, a change that aims to improve cross-SQL
support in project schemas.
I want to explicitly exclude the notion of getting rid of support for
PostgreSQL in the underlying project schemas, a topic that was discussed at
In this change, the author (Thomas Bechtold, copied on this thread) makes
the comment that the change "is not changing the schema. It just avoids
implicit type conversion".
It has long been my understanding that changes like this are not upgrade
friendly as it could lead to two installations both with, say version 37 or
38 of the schema, but different table structures. In effect, this change
breaks upgradability of systems.
i.e. a deployment which had a schema from the install of Ocata would have a
v38 table modules table with a default of 0 and one installed with Pike
(should this change be accepted) would have a modules table with a default
I'm raising this issue on the ML because the author also claims (albeit not
verified by me) that other projects have accepted changes like this.
I submit to you that the upgrade friendly way of making this change would
be to propose a new version of the schema which alters all of these tables
and includes the correct default value. On a fresh install, with no data,
the upgrade step with this new schema version would bring the table to the
right default value and any system with that version of the schema would
have an identical set of defaults. Similarly any system with v37 or 38 of
the schema would have identical defaults.
What's the advice of the community on this change; I've explicitly added
stable-maint-core as reviewers on this change as it does have stable branch
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)