Drop. It is wasting cycles, and not something we should use in
production. Migrations specific to SQLPlus are the most time consuming
work-arounds we have. SQLPlus does not suit our development approach.
On 02/03/2015 01:32 PM, Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
I think we should switch to
Andrew Pashkin apash...@mirantis.com wrote:
Mike Bayer wrote:
The patch seems to hardcode the conventions for MySQL and Postgresql.
The first thought I had was that in order to remove the dependence
on them here, you’d need to instead simply turn off the
“naming_convention” in the MetaData
Mike Bayer wrote:
The patch seems to hardcode the conventions for MySQL and Postgresql.
The first thought I had was that in order to remove the dependence
on them here, you’d need to instead simply turn off the
“naming_convention” in the MetaData if you detect that you’re on one
of those two
Andrew Pashkin apash...@mirantis.com wrote:
Mike Bayer wrote:
there’s always a naming convention in place; all databases other than
SQLite produce them on the fly if you don’t specify one. The purpose
of the Alembic/SQLAlchemy naming_convention feature is so that you
have *one* naming
I think we should switch to clean migration path. We do have production
installations but we can handle initial db uprgade case by case for
customers. It is better to fix this issue now when we have few customers
rather then doing later at larger scale.
Thanks
Georgy
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:05
Andrew Pashkin apash...@mirantis.com wrote:
Working on this issue I encountered another problem.
Most indices in the project has no names and because of that,
developer must reverse-engineer them in every migration.
Read about that also here [1].
SQLAlchemy and Alembic provide feature
Working on this issue I encountered another problem.
Most indices in the project has no names and because of that,
developer must reverse-engineer them in every migration.
Read about that also here [1].
SQLAlchemy and Alembic provide feature for generation constraint
names by pattern,
On 26.01.2015 18:34, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Andrew Pashkin apash...@mirantis.com wrote:
On 26.01.2015 18:05, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:
I think it's still important to perform migration specific checks. We want
to make sure that DB is in expected state after
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Andrew Pashkin apash...@mirantis.com wrote:
On 26.01.2015 18:05, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:
I think it's still important to perform migration specific checks. We want
to make sure that DB is in expected state after each specific migration.
Why?
1. It's not
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Andrew Pashkin apash...@mirantis.com wrote:
On 23.01.2015 23:39, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:
1. Use ModelsMigrationsSync from [2] in tests to make sure that SQLAlchemy
models are in sync with migrations. Usage example can be found at [3]
Seems like it is a great
/On 26.01.2015 18:05, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:/
/I think it's still important to perform migration specific checks. We
want to make sure that DB is in expected state after each specific
migration./
Why?
On 26.01.2015 18:05, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Andrew
/On 23.01.2015 23:39, Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote://
///
/1. Use ModelsMigrationsSync from [2] in tests to make sure that
SQLAlchemy models are in sync with migrations. Usage example can be
found at [3]/
Seems like it is a great helper, as I understand it runs all migrations
and then compares DB
Hello!
Current situation with SQLite support:
- Migration tests does not run on SQLIte.
- At the same time migrations themselves support SQLite (with bugs).
Today I came across this bug:
Error during execution of database downgrade
https://bugs.launchpad.net/murano/+bug/1399151
We can
Hi Andrew,
I understand the difficulties with SQLite support, but this is very useful
for development to have SQLite instead of any other DB. I think nodoby uses
SQLite in production, so probably we can just put a release note that there
is a know limitation with SQLite support.
Thanks
Gosha
On
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Andrew Pashkin apash...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hello!
Current situation with SQLite support:
- Migration tests does not run on SQLIte.
- At the same time migrations themselves support SQLite (with bugs).
Today I came across this bug:
Error during execution of
15 matches
Mail list logo
