On Dec 1, 3:07 pm, Gary Doades <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, it's a fair point, but that's why I'm trying to find out what is > needed and what isn't. > > To be honest, I'm not sure how to generate an actual *patch* for you > under Windows, which is where I'm at right now.
Grab a copy of msysgit: http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/ Grab the project source code: https://github.com/jeremyevans/sequel Edit the source file, commit it to the git repository, and use git format-patch to create a patch. Or get yourself a github account, fork the sequel repository, commit it to your github fork, and send a pull request. I realize it might take a little time to set up the first time, especially if you are unfamiliar with git and the related tools, but if you are going to be involved in the ruby community for any length of time, it's well worth the setup time. > As far as I can see then it boils down to: > > If you specify a :servers_hash option to raise an exception for non > configured shards you also need to specify a :read_only entry in your > :servers option for the case where a shard is not specified. In most > cases it is sufficient to add a :read_only entry to use the :default > shard by adding an entry :read_only => {}. > > Is this (more) correct according to the current code? It's more correct. Technically, you don't need to do so if all you are doing is inserts, updates, deletes, and schema statements. If you had such a write-only database connection, the current behavior without the read_only entry would probably be desired. But since most users want to read the data at some point, it's not a bad idea. Jeremy -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sequel-talk" 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/sequel-talk?hl=en.
