Rene, thanks, i think I just assumed that the postgres would have the same DDL as derby. I'd like to check in your version, but it appears that you did not attach it.
-mbs On 12/11/07, René Bos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello! > > I now have Ode 1.1 running in PostgreSQL. I first tried to migrate 1.0 to > 1.1, and fixed the database schema and all. But than I decided not to do a > migration but to re-execute all processes into Ode 1.1. This all worked > out! The only difference I can remember is in ode_message_route the change > from index to route_index. And somewhere a column made larger. > > I have attached the DDL, maybe you can use post it somewhere on the site > or in the distro. > > I saw something strange in the SVN repro. In > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ode/trunk/dao-hibernate-db/src/main/sql/simplesched-postgre.sql?view=markup > and > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ode/trunk/dao-hibernate-db/src/main/sql/simplesched-postgres.sql?view=markup > there is no PostgreSQL queries but for derby. For other schemas this is > also the case. > > Thanks! > > Rene > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Matthieu Riou > Sent: maandag 10 december 2007 16:40 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Upgrade from Ode 1.0 to 1.1 > > On Dec 10, 2007 12:01 AM, René Bos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > First I want to thank you for your answer (right on time, after > 2.5months? ;)). At the moment I have the time (and need) to do the upgrade > from > > Ode 1.0 to 1.1. Because I also want to use a PostgreSQL database with > Ode > > I did some research. I found out from the database dump that I don't > have > > anything in the quartz tables (Except from the QRTZ_LOCKS one). I think > this > > is because I don't use scheduled activities like wait. Now is my > question, > > should it be possible in this situation to use the same database in Ode > > 1.1 as with Ode 1.0? > > > > There have been some column additions/removal between 1.0 and 1.1 but I > don't think there's been many of them. If you diff your schema with the > one > we generate in ODE 1.1 and post it here we can probably tell you how to > handle all the differences. > > Also do you want to migrate running instances or just the history with > process definitions? I believe we changed the serialized representations > of > instances a bit so migrating running instances could be challenging. We're > currently implementing a fix for this so that migration from 1.1 to 1.2will > be easier. > > Cheers, > Matthieu > > > > > > Rene > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alex Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: woensdag 26 september 2007 16:17 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Upgrade from Ode 1.0 to 1.1 > > > > On 9/25/07, René Bos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I have Ode 1.0 running in production for about a month now, and its > > doing > > > very good! But I want to upgrade to Ode 1.1 and I was wondering how to > > do > > > that without having to stop all my processes. Normally I can do this, > > but I > > > think you guys changed the database structure for the new scheduler, > > isn't > > > it? Is there an upgrade script or something? > > > > > > Hi René, > > > > There are no upgrade scripts to upgrade from Ode 1.0 to 1.1 although we > > can > > definitely help. Beyond schema changes, I believe there are > differences > > between serialized objects (Quartz vs SimpleScheduler objects) so I > think > > there would be some coding involved. At Intalio we were fortunate > enough > > that customers have either migrated early to the SimpleScheduler, or > used > > co-existing instances of Ode until all older processes completed and the > > data archived. Depending on your environment, running coexisting Ode > > instances might be a simpler bet. And I can assure you that moving > > forward, we'll have migration scripts from 1.1 onwards. > > > > cheers, > > alex > > >
