Hi Andrew, Out of curiosity how many records are in your dmArchive table? I think the largest dmArchive table I have seen from our biggest client has around 7000 records. I am not sure what sort of gain you would get by truncating a table of this size. Remember this table is only populated when you create draft objects and archive items etc.
Are you sure you just don't need to purge the stats table which can definitely grow to a large amount if not regularly purged. If you have space limitations I would disable stats and rely on the weblogs for reporting purposes. Is this sql server? In which case a good starting point is to also check the databases transaction log and consider truncating and shrinking it. You should definitely do this if you have just purged an extremely large stats table. A guide for truncating and shrinking sql logs is available at: http://www.sql-server-performance.com/fg_sql_server_agent.asp FYI the fixrefobjects function Geoff mentioned removes orphan records from the refobjects table. Regards, Jason. On May 31, 2:07 pm, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Geoff, > > Yes you can politely remind me that this is not a commercial support forum. > However when I read the wiki it stated as I posted that most automate this > process. Yet when you go looking to see how people have automated this > process there are no examples what so ever. > > Secondly, someone like yourself could have been a bit more descriptive about > what is needed in the first place. I did say that I am not that familiar > with the relationships etc, if any and that I am seeking advice on that > matter of how to go about it. > > And yet when I made mention of (yes the refObjects table) it wasn't > discussed by anyone. > > Now if the wiki says that most people automate this procedure, that means > there are people here who could have answered that question. Yet I really > only got half the answer to my question, now that might be because I didn't > explain myself that well. But when you are learning, we don't always say > what you guys already know. > > I just felt that when I asked a question, and only got half an answer to > what I asked I am left wondering why the Farcry CMS system is not fully > documented after all this time. I even went looking for the API's to 3.0+ > and all I can find is 2.03 API's. I understand that you guys do this and > have it opensourced, but a bit more documentation wouldn't go astray:-) > > Now, the thing as I stated I want to truncate and remove all objects that > are older than a certain date (archived objects) the reason for this is that > our client has a limit on the size that database can be, I made that very > clear and wanted to know what I need to do to remove these references. So if > I truncate the dmArchive table, if there is any other table that has link > based on that dmArchiveId then I want to remove that as well. > > What is the point of only doing half the job? If we have the chance to clean > the DB properly then we should do that, and I find that leaving orphaned > data behind a lack of care by any programmer. And if that is your answer > about leaving orphaned files behind, then I am seriously debating on the > future of Farcry as its developers do not care about the product at all. > > So if I was to go back to my Boss and say well we can do this, but it is > going to leave this and that and I am not sure if it is going to hinder the > rest of the application. And then show him the response I got, how is that > going to be any good for Farcry in the future? > > So I appreciate your help on this matter, but seriously I am going to be > recommending we move away from Farcry based on the answer that Geoff has > outlined below. > > Andrew Scott > Senior Coldfusion Developer > Aegeon Pty. Ltd.www.aegeon.com.au > Phone: +613 8676 4223 > Mobile: 0404 998 273 > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of modius > Sent: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 4:05 PM > To: farcry-dev > Subject: [farcry-dev] Re: Still seeking an answer Geoff : RE: [farcry-dev] > Re: Audits and Archives > > Having orphaned dmArchive objects in this table should not affect the system > adversely. > > Regards, > > -- geoffhttp://www.daemon.com.au/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "farcry-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/farcry-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
