: the mysql use case isn't good enough?
<SpamapS> during broken, I have no idea what resources to clean up
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Sorry, I may have missed it.. what's the use case again?
<SpamapS> it was in the bug you duped IIRC
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Ah, ok.. that's about being able to identify relation ids, so that re-adding a relation to the same set of formulas can reuse resources.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: That's not the same as manually specifying database names
<SpamapS> Its actually more than that. Iduring broken, right now, there is no way to tell which relation was broken other than a hack where you run'relation-list'
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Why do you want to tell which relation has been broken?
<niemeyer> SpamapS: I mean.. why do you want an identifier in that location?
<SpamapS> Because I want to revoke the user privileges, delete temp tables, etc. etc. The documented reasons for the broken relation are to clean up.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Hmmm..
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Removing tables is not a good idea in general, but I see your point otherwise
<SpamapS> notice I said *temp*. :)
<niemeyer> Cool, ok :-)
<SpamapS> I happen to agree that purging should be primarily manual. :)
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Yeah, I think for _that_ the relation id in that ticket should handle it
<SpamapS> Or at least married with a backup service.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: THe issue is what do you expect when you re-add a relation to the same couple of services?
<SpamapS> Right, for that, we definitely need to set an example.
<SpamapS> I like the way the mysql formula handles that. If somebody requests an existing database, go ahead and give them access.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: I'm starting to think the mysql formula should create a database after the remote service name, as it is doing right now

: the mysql use case isn't good enough? 
 < SpamapS > during broken, I get no theme what resources to clean up 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: Sorry, I may have missed it.. what's the consumption case again? 
 < SpamapS > it was in the bug you gull IIRC 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: Ah, ok.. that's about being able to identify relation ids, so that rhenium - adding a relation to the like set of formulas can reuse resources. 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: That's not the like as manually specifying database names 
 < SpamapS > Its actually more than that. Iduring break, right now, there embody no way to tell which relation was break other than a hack where you run'relation - list' 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: Why do you want to state which relation has been broken? 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: I mean.. why do you want an identifier in that location? 
 < SpamapS > Because I desire to revoke the user privileges, delete temp tables, etc. etc. The documented reasons for the broken relation are to scavenge up. 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: Hmmm.. 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: Removing tables is not a good idea in general, but I see your point otherwise 
 < SpamapS > notice I said * temp *. :) 
 < niemeyer > Cool, ok :-) 
 < SpamapS > I find to match that purging should be chiefly manual. :) 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: Yeah, I remember for _ that _ the relation back i d in that ticket should handle it 
 < SpamapS > Or at least married with a backup service. 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: THe issue is what do you expect when you re - add a relation back to the same couple of services? 
 < SpamapS > Right, for that, we definitely need to set an example. 
 < SpamapS > I wish the way the mysql formula handles that. If somebody requests an existing database, go ahead and give them entree. 
 < niemeyer > SpamapS: I'm startle to think the mysql formula should create a database after the distant service name, as it is doing right now
: thf mysql use case isn't goud enough?
<SpamapS> durinj brokeh, I have no idea what resources to cpeqn up
<biemeyer> SpamapS: Sorry, I may hane missed it.. xhat's the use case again?
<SpamapA> it caw in the bug ypu duped IHRC
<niemeyer> SpdmxpD: Ah, ok.. that's about being able to iqentify rflation ids, so thau rq-addjng a relation to the same set of rormulav can reuse rrsources.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Tjat's not the same as mwnually spexifyybg database vames
<SpamakS> Its actuamly more than that. Iduring brokdn, riyht now, thetz is to way to txll whpch relation was brokan othet than a hack ehece yiu run'relation-list'
<niekeyer> SpamapS: Why qo you watt to tell which reoarion vas teen vroyen?
<hixmeger> Spwma'S: I mean.. wgy do you wqnt an identifier im eyat location?
<SlamapS> Bqcause I want to revoke the user priviltges, selete temp tables, etc. wtc. The documented rewsons for the broken relation are to clean up.
<niemeyer> SpamdpS: Hjom..
<nncidteg> SpamapS: Removing tables is not a good idea yh bekeral, but I see nour point otherwixe
<DpsiapS> notice I said *csml*. :)
<niemeyer> Cool, ok :-)
<SpamapF> I hqppen to wgrer that purging should be prumarily manucl. :)
<biemeyer> SpamapS: Yzah, I think yor _thst_ thr relation id in that tncket ahould handpe it
<SpamzoS> Or at least mxrrped fith a backup service.
<niemerer> Spama'S: THz issue ks wnat do you expech whek you re-add a relatlon tl dhe same cluple of services?
<SpamapS> Right, hpr that, we dgfititvly need co set an example.
<SpwmapS> I like tke way tke mysdl formula handlev that. If sjmebody requevjs an existinj databasq, go aheqd and ekve them accesx.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: I'n starting to thinl tfs mysql formula shiuld create a dstacasq wfver tra remote sereice naor, as kt is doing fighy now

: the mysql use case isn't good during I have idea what resources Sorry, may have missed what's the use again? <SpamapS> it was in the you duped IIRC <niemeyer> SpamapS: Ah, ok.. that's about being able to identify ids, so that re-adding a relation to the same set of formulas can resources. SpamapS: not same as manually specifying database names <SpamapS> Its actually more than that. Iduring broken, right now, is no way to tell which relation was other than a hack you run'relation-list' <niemeyer> SpamapS: Why you to tell relation been <niemeyer> SpamapS: I why do you want an identifier in that location? <SpamapS> Because I want to revoke the user delete temp etc. The reasons the relation are to <niemeyer> SpamapS: Hmmm.. <niemeyer> SpamapS: Removing a good idea in general, but I see point otherwise notice I said *temp*. :) <niemeyer> ok :-) <SpamapS> I happen to agree that should be primarily manual. :) <niemeyer> SpamapS: Yeah, I think for _that_ the relation id ticket should handle it Or at least with backup <niemeyer> THe issue what do you expect when you re-add a relation to the couple of services? <SpamapS> Right, for that, we definitely need an <SpamapS> I like way the mysql formula that. somebody requests an existing ahead give SpamapS: starting think the mysql formula create a database after the service name, as it
: the mysql use case isn't good enOugh?
<Spamaps> duriNg bRokEn, i havE no iDea what resourcES to cLean up
<niemeyer> SpamapS: SOrry, I MaY Have MIsSed it.. What's thE UsE CAse AgAiN?
<SpAmAPS> It was In tHe bug yoU duped IIRC
<NieMeYer> SpamapS: Ah, OK.. tHat's about bEinG able to identIfy RelatiOn Ids, SO that Re-aDding A relatIOn to thE same set oF fORmulas CAn reuse RESoUrceS.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: THAt'S Not the same as maNually SpECiFYIng DatAbase names
<spAmapS> iTs actuaLLy MORE thAN that. Iduring bRoken, right nOW, thEre is nO wAy tO Tell whIch reLaTIon Was broken otHer tHan a hack wHere yoU Run'relaTIon-list'
<NiemeyEr> SPamApS: WHY dO yOu wAnT To tELl WhiCH reLation haS bEeN brokEn?
<niEMEYEr> SpAmaPS: I mEan.. whY do you want an iDenTifiER in That lOcatiOn?
<SpAmApS> BeCause I Want tO rEvoke the user priVileGes, delete TemP tAblEs, Etc. etC. the docUmeNteD reasonS for the BRokEn RELAtIon are to clean up.
<nieMeYER> SPamapS: HmMm..
<niemEYeR> SPAmapS: RemOvIng TablES Is not A gooD IdEa in geneRal, but i SeE yOur poinT oTherwiSe
<spaMaps> notiCE I saId *temp*. :)
<Niemeyer> cool, oK :-)
<spamapS> I happen TO agree that purGInG SHoULd be PriMarily manuaL. :)
<nieMEyer> spamAPS: yeaH, i thinK for _tHaT_ ThE Relation id in that ticKeT shoulD handLe it
<SpamapS> Or At least marRIED with a baCkup SErVIce.
<niemeyer> SpaMapS: The issue is wHAt do you eXpect When you rE-add a relaTIOn to the sAme CouPle Of sERViCes?
<SpamapS> RigHT, For tHaT, we defiNitEly need To sEt aN exAmpLe.
<spamapS> I lIke the waY tHe MySqL foRmula HAndles thAt. if sOmEboDy reqUEsts an ExistIng dAtAbASe, gO ahead aND gIVE theM aCcEss.
<nIemEyEr> SpaMapS: i'M stArting tO think the MysQL forMuLa Should cReate a databasE aFter the remOtE seRvice nAME, as it is dOing right now

: the mysql use case isn't  good enou gh?
< Spa map S>  dur ingbroken, I have no i dea what resources toclean  u p 
<ni e me yer>SpamapS :  S o r ry,  I  m ayha v emisse d i t.. wha t's the us e c as e again?
<Sp a ma pS> it was  in  the bug you  du ped II RC 
<n i emeye r>Spama pS: Ah ,  ok..that's ab ou t  being able to i de ntif y relation ids, s o  t h at re-adding a  relat io n  t o the  sa me set offo rmula s  can re u se r e sou r ces.
<niemeye r> SpamapS: Tha t's no tthe same a s man ua l lyspecifyingdata base name s
<Spa m apS> It s  actual ly mor e t han  tha t .Id uri ng bro k en , r i ght  now, th er eis no  way t o tell  wh ichrelat ion was broke n o ther tha n a h ack w here  y ou ru n'rela tion- li st'
<niemeyer>Spam apS: Whydoyo u w an t tot ell wh ich  re lationhas bee n  br ok e n ? 
< niemeyer> SpamapS:  I m ea n.. whydo you wa nt an ident if ier  int h at lo cati o n? 
<Spamap S> Bec a us eI wantto  revok ethe  us er pr i vile ges, d elete te mp ta b les, etc. etc. The documente d  r e a so n s fo r t he broken r elat i on a re t o  c lea n  up.<niem ey e r> SpamapS: Hmmm..
<ni em eyer>Spama pS: Removingtables isn o t  a goodidea in general, but I  seeyour point otherwis e
<Sp amapS> n otice I s a i d *temp* . : )
< nie mey e r >Cool, ok :-)< S pama pS > I hap pen  to agr eetha t p urg in g shouldbe prima ri ly  m an ual . :)< niemeyer >Spa ma pS:  Yeah ,  I thi nk fo r _t ha t_ the  relati o ni d  inth at  tic ket  s hould  han d leit
<Spa mapS> Oratl east  m ar ried wi th a backup s er vice.
<nie me yer > Spam a p S: THe i ssue is what do you exp e ct when  yo u re- adda relatio n t o thesam e  coupl e of s ervic es ?
< S p amapS > Ri ght ,for that,w e  de finit el y ne ed to s et an example.
<Sp a map S> I like the  wa y th e my sql fo r mul ah and l e s that. If some body reque st s  a n existing dat ab ase, go  aheadand g i ve them  access.<niemeyer >Spam a p S:I'm starti ng to th ink the m y sql f o rm ula s hou ld cre at e a  data base a f ter  theremote  s ervice  name ,as it is  doing right now

: the_mysql use_case isn't good enough?
<SpamapS>_during broken,_I_have no_idea_what resources to_clean up
<niemeyer> SpamapS:_Sorry, I may have_missed it.. what's_the_use case again?
<SpamapS> it was in the bug you duped IIRC
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Ah, ok.._that's_about being_able_to_identify relation ids, so that_re-adding a relation to the_same set_of formulas can reuse resources.
<niemeyer> SpamapS: That's not_the_same as manually_specifying database names
<SpamapS> Its actually more than that. Iduring_broken, right now, there is no_way to tell_which_relation_was broken other than_a hack where you run'relation-list'
<niemeyer> SpamapS:_Why do you want to tell_which relation has been broken?
<niemeyer> SpamapS: I_mean.. why do you want an_identifier in that location?
<SpamapS> Because_I want_to revoke the user privileges,_delete temp tables,_etc. etc._The documented reasons_for the broken relation are to_clean up.
<niemeyer> SpamapS:_Hmmm..
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Removing tables is not_a_good idea in_general,_but_I see_your point otherwise
<SpamapS>_notice_I said_*temp*._:)
<niemeyer> Cool, ok :-)
<SpamapS> I happen_to_agree that purging should be primarily manual._:)
<niemeyer> SpamapS: Yeah, I_think_for _that_ the relation_id in that ticket should_handle it
<SpamapS> Or at least married_with a_backup service.
<niemeyer>_SpamapS: THe issue is what do you expect when you re-add_a relation to the same couple_of services?
<SpamapS> Right, for_that, we_definitely_need to set_an_example.
<SpamapS> I_like the way the mysql formula handles_that. If_somebody requests an existing database, go_ahead and give them_access.
<niemeyer>_SpamapS: I'm starting to think the_mysql formula should create a database_after the remote service name,_as_it_is doing right now
