[Koha-devel] Update database changes proposal [IMPORTANT]

[Paul Poulain]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Le 23/11/2011 17:02, Marcel de Rooy a écrit :
> Quote from Bugzilla #7167 Here is how it works: * each database
> update is stored in a numbered file, in
> installer/data/mysql/versions * database updates can be .sql or .pl
> files. 2 skeletons are provided to explain how it works * there is
> no more automatic checking of the database update on each page. The
> librarian/sysadmin must go to the admin/updatedatabase.pl page on
> each update. * the updatedatabase.pl script keep track of all
> updates that have been applied, how it went. And it's non-linear:
> 3.7.2.3 can be applied after 3.7.2.4 * The about.pl will display
> the highest db update applied, but maybe there are some missing,
> it's only the highest applied [End of quote]
> 
> My questions are now: How do I submit a new db update?
just create a file under installer/data/mysql/versions

> I cannot give it a number myself; in that case somebody else could
> have a patch pending using that number already. So I assume that
> the RM renames the file. What convention do we use?
yes you can : as it's not linear, you can. To know which numbers have
been "reserved", we could have a wiki page.
If you've reserved 3.07.01.017 and someone has a 3.07.01.018, the 018
can be pushed *before* your 017, there's no problem with that.

> Is there still a check at login time if all updates have been run
> which redirects to the update screen?
no. Because it takes a long time to check all versions, and, as it's
unlinearized, you must check each version, not just check you've the
"highest number"

> I would say that we do not need that check everywhere, but I would
> keep it at login time.
This idea could be investigated for someone that log-in with admin
permission, for example.
Does others think it's a must-have ? Here at BibLibre, most of us
think checking the database update is a part of an update, so if it's
not made, it means you're doing a poor job.

> Would you allow an admin to install only partially the updates?
> Isn't that asking for trouble?
yes, you could. Even if, I agree, that would be a strange idea. And
that's why there is a [UPDATE] on the top that update everything

> It is not linear, but some patches with db updates will be
> sensitive to the order applied. Is there any logic to prevent
> problems in that area?
Nope, and we discussed a lot of this during hackfest, there is no
solution for this.
Plus, investigating actual updatedatabase show only a few cases that
could cause a problem. 90% of the updates are syspref/index/foreign
keys related.

HTH
- -- 
Paul POULAIN
http://www.biblibre.com
Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc
Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOzSVIAAoJEK81SonuhyGo4JAIAJWxr3IMX8OgxDU2a4QNgwQD
BRcKqNQDTG3YJneW7CRh959wglzk2gABQdiKcZqoO0XrAKNnqxaEinrpWbbTq63p
4yev1h8A1RFYwMYjtHSsFtdJFDWBf6XWPzHkl5gscPohPbFWteLBqeNePgTxXkh+
D4dPi6PG1HPK3iAt75tv26zruLA3Zn9DsML1Zhv0hvLqgsuFVobmXFA8R4OGRawm
CGaPFD5NZW1PfHjqNdAC4Bfb0hrqd59q1+bTlsDcd2gJrePKelDmC8Yge2S9n3GN
v/g+vWq0Vmmd1fdEfFWkui60iw9XJizKA0JFOpcq1Dzc5Z+OzQMelkxyHcYLtkM=
=xN9m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----