Koha-devel

Download

koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org

September 2007

15 participants
22 discussions

database analysis (diff between 22+updatedatabase and kohastructure.sql)
by Paul POULAIN 04 Sep '07

04 Sep '07

I have reviewed all the diffs between my ipt3 database, that is a koha 2.2 + updatedatabase and the head (3.0) kohastructure.sql There are lots of varchar/char differences =============================================== http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/silent-column-changes.html says : Before MySQL 5.0.3, VARCHAR columns with a length less than four are changed to CHAR. OK, my database was on mySQL 4.1 previously, thus the differences. I discard them, it's meaningless anyway There are a lot of NOT NULL default '' vs NOT NULL ================================================== (or NOT NULL default 0 vs NOT NULL) http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/data-type-defaults.html says : If the column cannot take NULL as the value, MySQL defines the column with an explicit DEFAULT clause, using the implicit default value for the column data type. Implicit defaults are defined as follows: For numeric types, the default is 0, with the exception that for integer types declared with the AUTO_INCREMENT attribute, the default is the next value in the sequence. For date and time types other than TIMESTAMP, the default is the appropriate “zero” value for the type. For the first TIMESTAMP column in a table, the default value is the current date and time. See Section 10.3, “Date and Time Types”. For string types other than ENUM, the default value is the empty string. For ENUM, the default is the first enumeration value. So the differences as meaningless, I discard them as well. (hereafter, when I write x VS Y, I mean kohastructure.sql VS mydatabase) action_logs : text vs mediumtext : ================================== just differ on the length the record can contain, but even text is enough (http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/storage-requirements.html) biblioitems ============ - volumedesc is text VS char(255). Harmless, text is better (although more space consuming) - some columns (the new ones) are not at the same place in the table. harmless - marc longblob vs blob : marc column is deprecated & could be dropped soon if I don't mind. howeber, longblob is better browser ======== don't exist VS exist : this table is speficically created & filled by a specific script, I'll explain on request what it is for categorytable ============== text VS mediumtext : harmless, anyway, text is too large imho charges ======== don't exist VS exist : kohastructure is right. we can drop it. deletedbiblioitems ==================== dewey 8,6 VS char(30) : kohastructure must be modified to char(30), as in biblioitems. deleteditems ================ barcode char(9) VS char(30) : kohastructure must be modified to char(30), char(9) is too small for some libraries items ================= homebranch : char(4) VS char(10) : this one is a major diff, that can cause bugs. ***MUST*** be changed in kohastructure, or contraints will fail. itemsprices ============= don't exist VS exist : kohastructure is right. we can drop it. labels ============== - batch_id exist VS don't exist : kohastructure probably right. - ENGINE=myISAM VS ENGINE=InnoDB : MUST be changed in kohastructure labels_conf : =============== - lot of differences : my structure has to be updated (however, ipt don't use label facilities, so they don't care ;-) ) - ENGINE=myISAM VS ENGINE=InnoDB : MUST be changed in kohastructure labels_templates : =================== table has to be added on my side letters & many other tables ========== mediumtext VS text : harmless, both are acceptable. mediumtext maybe a little bit better although marc_biblio ============ can be dropped on my side, I agree mediatypetable : ================= exist VS don't exist : i'm right imho, kohastructure should drop this table sessionqueries =============== don't exist VS exist : kohastructure is right. we can drop it. subcategorytable ================= exist VS don't exist : i'm right imho, kohastructure should drop this table subscription ============== firstacquidate : NULL default NULL vs NOT NULL. hdl will confirm, but I think NOT NULL is better here subscriptionhistory ============== histstartdate : NULL default NULL vs NOT NULL. hdl will confirm, but I think NOT NULL is better here users/websites / z3950queue/ z3950queries =============== don't exist VS exist : kohastructure is right. we can drop them Foreign keys ============== on my side most constraints are repeated, I don't know why, but it's stupid As a conclusion : I should do that test again on another 22+updatedatabase config, to be sure, but it seems there are no so many diffs between kohastructure.sql & 22+updatedatabase. I'll let you know ASAP -- Paul POULAIN et Henri Damien LAURENT Consultants indépendants en logiciels libres et bibliothéconomie (http://www.koha-fr.org) Tel : 04 91 31 45 19

1 0

Testing Koha 3
by Bradley Duane Peters 03 Sep '07

03 Sep '07

Hello, I'm aware that Koha 3 is not yet even in beta, but I'd be interested to know whether its at the point were it can be run. I have also looked at the Roadmap on the wiki but at this point I'm not familiar enough with the codebase to interpret that properly. I did the basic checkout from the public Git repository and have been looking at that. It's very possible I've missed it because I'm not very familiar with Koha but I can't find any of the zebra database stuff. In short, is it possible to setup an instance of Koha using the code from the repository? And, if so is there somewhere in particular I should be looking for help? Thanks, Bradley Peters.

3 3