Am 12.07.2016 um 12:25 schrieb Jaime Crespo:
> Your last question is a non issue for me- I do not care if things are
> on the database or on configuration- that is not the issue I have been
> complaining about.

Yea, still something we need to figure out :)

I'm fine with the DB based solution, if we have decent tooling for extensions to
register their content models, etc.

> What I blocked is having 6000 million rows (x40 due to redundancy)
> with the same column value "gzip; version 3 (1-2-3-testing-testing. It
> seems to work)" when it can be summarized as a 1-byte or less id (and
> that id be explained somewhere else). 

Yea, that's not what I would recommend either. What I meant is that we can now,
as a stepping stone and without blocking on a schema change, fill in the null
values in the revision table for the revisions of a page that is being converted
to a new model, to avoid confusion. Converting pages to a different model is
relatively rare, so I think it would not have much of an impact on the big 
picture.

> Of course there are a lot of history and legacy and maintenance
> issues, but when the guy that actually would spend days of his life
> running schema changes so they do not affect production is the one
> begging for them to happen you know there is an issue. And this is not
> a "mediawiki" is bad complain- I think mediawiki is a very good piece
> of software- I only want to make it better with very, very small
> maintenance-like changes.

I'm all for it!

> 
>> The disadvantage is of course that the model and format are not obvious when
>> eyeballing the result of an SQL query.
> 
> Are you serious? Because this is super-clear already :-P:

That was, if I remember correctly, one of the arguments for using readable
strings there, instead of int values and a config variable, as I originally
proposed. This was discussed at the last Berlin hackathon, must have been 2012.
Tim may remember more details. We should probably re-consider the pros and cons
we discussed back then when planning to change the scham now.

-- daniel

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to