Bug #4168

Migrate task in 1.2 release is not bumping database version during upgrades

Added by Jesús García Crespo over 8 years ago. Updated over 7 years ago.

Status:VerifiedStart date:
Priority:HighDue date:
Assignee:David Juhasz% Done:

0%

Category:-
Target version:Release 1.3
Google Code Legacy ID:atom-2220 Tested version:
Sponsored: Requires documentation:

Description

To reproduce this error: ========================
1) Upgrade a YAML file from 1.1 to 1.2 (use 1.2 tarball)
2) $ grep -A 5 -B 1 "name: version" migrated_data_20120112211615.yml

Resulting error: ================
version field should be bumped to 75 (db version in 1.2) but 62 (db version in 1.1) is still there

- THE FIX SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER USERS WHO ALREADY UPGRADED TO 1.2 BUT THEIR DB VERSION IS STILL "62"

[g] Legacy categories: Migration task

History

#1 Updated by Jesús García Crespo over 8 years ago

As of r10670, the version is bumped as expected. We still need some work to be able to upgrade users from 1.2 to newer releases, affected by this bug.

#2 Updated by Jesús García Crespo over 8 years ago

20:29 < djjuhasz> Sevein: re migration script, I think the best way to go is:
20:29 < djjuhasz> a) add a --release-120-fix flag
20:30 < djjuhasz> or b) add a separate task like you suggested
20:30 < djjuhasz> e.g. ./symfony propel:release-120-fix
20:30 < djjuhasz> bit of a pain for the users, but I don't think we can help it
20:31 < Sevein> the --release-120-fix flag is for propel:migrate, right?
20:33 < mcantelon> djjuhasz: What happens if the user forgets to include the flag?
20:35 < djjuhasz> we could add a confirm dialog i guess
20:35 < djjuhasz> cuz it will screw up their data
20:35 < Sevein> yep, good idea
20:35 < Sevein> "Are you migrating from ICA-AtoM 1.1?" sth like that
20:35 < djjuhasz> problem is we can't check for a specific database version, it could be anything pre-1.2
20:36 < djjuhasz> Sevein: yep
20:36 * Sevein will update the <a title="XML - EAD export" class="closed_ref" href="/p/qubit-toolkit/issues/detail?id=20"> issue
20 </a>:37 < djjuhasz> in that case maybe we should just have the confirm dialog, and have a --no-cofirm option
20:37 < djjuhasz> or something
20:38 < mcantelon> djjuhasz: Crappy... so there's nothing that was added specifically to the 1.2 schema that would distinguish it from earlier versions...
20:39 < djjuhasz> i don't think so
20:40 < djjuhasz> aside from some menus, but I think that's a poor criteria
20:40 < Sevein> accession stuff...
20:41 < djjuhasz> yeah, but those tables won't show up in yaml unless they have added accession data
20:41 < djjuhasz> which isn't guaranteed
20:41 < Sevein> but terms, taxonomies
20:41 < djjuhasz> oh yeah
20:41 < Sevein> protected terms
20:41 < djjuhasz> that's a good idea
20:42 < Sevein> that's what we talked in the mail thread, checking for 1.1 data before the db version is evaluated
20:42 < Sevein> options to avoid the user painnnnn
20:43 < mcantelon> Yes! The dreaded user pain. :..[
20:43 < Sevein> hehe
20:44 < djjuhasz> still, i think a confirm dialog is a good idea
20:44 < djjuhasz> but the taxonomies check sounds pretty strong
20:44 < Sevein> so you would do both?
20:45 < mcantelon> Good plan... the user as sanity check.

#3 Updated by Anonymous over 8 years ago

  • Priority changed from Critical to High
  • Target version changed from Release 1.2.1 to Release 1.3

[g] Labels added: Milestone-Release-1.3, Priority-High
[g] Labels removed: Milestone-Release-1.2.1, Priority-Critical

#4 Updated by David Juhasz over 8 years ago

  • Status changed from New to QA/Review

The 1.2 -> 1.3 upgrade task now tests for an incorrect version of '62' (Added in r11615)

[g] New owner: David Juhasz

#5 Updated by David Juhasz about 8 years ago

Reassign to new account.

[g] New owner: David Juhasz

#6 Updated by David Juhasz about 8 years ago

  • Status changed from QA/Review to Verified

Also available in: Atom PDF