[mythtv] Schema updates

Isaac Richards ijr at case.edu
Sun Mar 4 03:38:50 UTC 2007


On Saturday 03 March 2007 9:26:26 pm f-myth-users at media.mit.edu wrote:
>     > Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 09:37:04 +0000
>     > From: Allan Stirling <Dibblahmythml0015 at pendor.org>
>     >
>     > And adding _another_ manual step doesn't improve matters for
>     > anyone.
>
> As I said in another reply, the idea is that SVN users who pull a
> version every few days leave the switch set to "dangerous" and
> everything works the way it's worked since Myth had the ability to
> auto-update the schema at all.  But people who use point-releases
> or packages will have the switch set to "warn me before charging
> ahead" and therefore won't get screwed if for some reason they didn't
> -think- they were updating.  (Think people who run some sort of
> automatic upgrade-everything every night; if that happens to update
> Myth, they're screwed, since updating one machine in a multi-machine
> setup is guaranteed to break everything.)
>
> More to the point:
>
>   WHY is it even POSSIBLE for a frontend to upgrade the DB schema if
>   the backend isn't that recent?  For example:  I'm running 0.18.1.
>   I accidentally run 0.20 on a frontend anywhere on my network that's
>   heard of the backend.  Bam!  My MBE now has a 0.20 DB, but the -code-
>   there still expects a 0.18 DB!  This is not a supported (or tested)
>   configuration, so why does Myth go -out of its way- to put the user
>   in this situation?
>
> That's part of why I don't understand the reluctance to making DB
> schema upgrades NOT happen AUTOMATICALLY from a FRONTEND.

There are users that don't use the tv recording functionality, and thus don't 
ever have the backend running, or ever run mythtv-setup.  That's reason 
enough for me to keep things as they are for now.

It all becomes a non-issue if we move to an embedded db, too - the database 
(server/backend/whatever) itself will be the only thing upgrading the schema, 
then.

> I'm not sure who you're speaking to here.  Certainly not me, since I
> haven't submitted a patch for this.  I do find it unfortunate that
> usleepless has said, "I've got a ton of patches to improve Myth;
> here's the first one...  hello?...  hello?...  okay, well, I won't
> bother submitting more until the first one gets looked at"--- and got
> -threatened- in response.  But that's not a situation I can help with
> at all.

Yeah.  I don't get it either.  Ok, listen up, developers.  As of right now, 
mostly cosmetic patches that are submitted by people that don't always bother 
testing first are absolute highest priority around here.  No work on anything 
else until all those get committed.  Chop chop. =)

Really, though - the unapplied patch in question doesn't really do anything 
aside from remove some fairly low-overhead extraneous tests.  The valid 
portions of the guy's other patch (the freebsd stuff) got applied rather 
quickly.  The cosmetic one will get applied when someone has enough free 
time.  I believe that's rather reasonable.

Isaac


More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list