[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Managing database change: improvements needed

My question about user database changes was sparked by a vague 
remembrance of a text saying to use inheritance.  Apparently,
I misremembered.

For myself, I am leaning toward setting up a local repository.
I would have liked to avoid adding a larger version control 
requirement for my eventual replacement.

For minor local changes, managing the sql model is relatively easy,
it is the user view that tends to grow into the odd cracks.

> >>> We have a main schema file for the table definitions and a number of
> >>> modules with stored procedures grouped by "subject".

> >>> Next to that, there's a "Fixes" file, which contains all incremental
> >>> updates to the schema since some version.

> >>> When I want to change the schema as part of our development, I need to
> >>> change the schema definition files *and* I need to add the schema changes
> >>> to the Fixes.sql file.

Sqitch would seem to just help break this down into lots of little scripts
that can be written over time.  I don't see the  benefit.

It would be conceptually simpler to have side-by-side installations
and migrating.  Having differing versions up could be of value.


Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
Ledger-smb-devel mailing list