Comment 4 for bug 1080864

Member == tenant. That's good to know, thanks. Can you change the help text to reflect that?

I'm not sure it's as costly as you might think - of course, the scales that I'm thinking about are much smaller than say, Rackspace or Amazon sized clouds. I think the the majority of the private/hybrid cloud deployers are only going to have a few tenants (<<100) and a few VM flavors (<20). Again, that's my gut feeling. Even if these are 2 orders of magnitude larger, the calls to any database is not going to be bad. If it is a concern use some client side cache - this is data that's not going to change very often.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see case #2 happening.

I pretty much figured this wouldn't get addressed for Essex and maybe not even in Folsom, but yes, I'll follow the blueprint discussion and pipe up when something piques my interest.

Thanks!