Project: Drupal
Version: 4.5.2
Component: base system
Category: feature requests
Priority: normal
Assigned to: Anonymous
Reported by: jhefmv24
Updated by: jhefmv24
Status: patch
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/system.module_3.patch (1.03 KB)
patch of /modules/system.module 4.5.2 version to set proxy settings
jhefmv24
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 19, 2004 - 13:01 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc (37.11 KB)
I think the RSS feeds don't work if there is proxy server running. The
request/connection is somehow being blocked.
The connection should be made first to the proxy and once it is
established, then request can made.
I think the core function drupal_http_request() under
/includes/common.inc doesn't support this.
One workaround is change the code from:
<?php
switch ($uri['scheme']) {
case 'http':
//$fp = @fsockopen($uri['host'], ($uri['port'] ? $uri['port']
: 80), $errno, $errstr, 15);
?>
into:
<?php
//use proxy settings
$fp = @fsockopen('proxy2', '8080');
?>
And then create the request by change from:
<?php
$request = "$method $path HTTP/1.0\r\n";
?>
Into:
<?php
$request = "$method ".$uri['scheme']."://".$uri['host'].$path."
HTTP/1.1\r\n";
?>
And comment out the lines:
<?php
$request .= implode("\r\n", $defaults);
?>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 07:38 : Anonymous
Did this ever get taken care of in 4.5.2. I can't seem to get any feed
to work from behind a firewall. Getting error....
Failed to parse RSS feed Microsoft Security Info: 10060 A connection
attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond
after a period of time, or established connection failed because
connected host has failed to respond..
At home this same feed works fine, so I know it's not the feed.
Thanks,
SlackNet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 4, 2005 - 12:24 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc_4.patch (1.37 KB)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /includes/common.inc for drupal-4.4.2 version
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 4, 2005 - 12:25 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/system.module_2.patch (956 bytes)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /modules/system.module for drupal-4.4.2 version
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 4, 2005 - 12:31 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc_5.patch (1.35 KB)
patch for /includes/common.inc 4.5.2 version to facilitate rss feeds
behind firewall
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/7881
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/7881
Project: Drupal
-Version: 4.4.2
+Version: 4.5.2
Component: base system
Category: feature requests
Priority: normal
Assigned to: Anonymous
Reported by: jhefmv24
Updated by: jhefmv24
Status: patch
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc_5.patch (1.35 KB)
patch for /includes/common.inc 4.5.2 version to facilitate rss feeds
behind firewall
jhefmv24
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 19, 2004 - 13:01 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc (37.11 KB)
I think the RSS feeds don't work if there is proxy server running. The
request/connection is somehow being blocked.
The connection should be made first to the proxy and once it is
established, then request can made.
I think the core function drupal_http_request() under
/includes/common.inc doesn't support this.
One workaround is change the code from:
<?php
switch ($uri['scheme']) {
case 'http':
//$fp = @fsockopen($uri['host'], ($uri['port'] ? $uri['port']
: 80), $errno, $errstr, 15);
?>
into:
<?php
//use proxy settings
$fp = @fsockopen('proxy2', '8080');
?>
And then create the request by change from:
<?php
$request = "$method $path HTTP/1.0\r\n";
?>
Into:
<?php
$request = "$method ".$uri['scheme']."://".$uri['host'].$path."
HTTP/1.1\r\n";
?>
And comment out the lines:
<?php
$request .= implode("\r\n", $defaults);
?>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 07:38 : Anonymous
Did this ever get taken care of in 4.5.2. I can't seem to get any feed
to work from behind a firewall. Getting error....
Failed to parse RSS feed Microsoft Security Info: 10060 A connection
attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond
after a period of time, or established connection failed because
connected host has failed to respond..
At home this same feed works fine, so I know it's not the feed.
Thanks,
SlackNet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 4, 2005 - 12:24 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc_4.patch (1.37 KB)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /includes/common.inc for drupal-4.4.2 version
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 4, 2005 - 12:25 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/system.module_2.patch (956 bytes)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /modules/system.module for drupal-4.4.2 version
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/7881
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/7881
Project: Drupal
Version: 4.4.2
Component: base system
Category: feature requests
Priority: normal
Assigned to: Anonymous
Reported by: jhefmv24
Updated by: jhefmv24
Status: patch
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/system.module_2.patch (956 bytes)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /modules/system.module for drupal-4.4.2 version
jhefmv24
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 19, 2004 - 13:01 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc (37.11 KB)
I think the RSS feeds don't work if there is proxy server running. The
request/connection is somehow being blocked.
The connection should be made first to the proxy and once it is
established, then request can made.
I think the core function drupal_http_request() under
/includes/common.inc doesn't support this.
One workaround is change the code from:
<?php
switch ($uri['scheme']) {
case 'http':
//$fp = @fsockopen($uri['host'], ($uri['port'] ? $uri['port']
: 80), $errno, $errstr, 15);
?>
into:
<?php
//use proxy settings
$fp = @fsockopen('proxy2', '8080');
?>
And then create the request by change from:
<?php
$request = "$method $path HTTP/1.0\r\n";
?>
Into:
<?php
$request = "$method ".$uri['scheme']."://".$uri['host'].$path."
HTTP/1.1\r\n";
?>
And comment out the lines:
<?php
$request .= implode("\r\n", $defaults);
?>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 07:38 : Anonymous
Did this ever get taken care of in 4.5.2. I can't seem to get any feed
to work from behind a firewall. Getting error....
Failed to parse RSS feed Microsoft Security Info: 10060 A connection
attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond
after a period of time, or established connection failed because
connected host has failed to respond..
At home this same feed works fine, so I know it's not the feed.
Thanks,
SlackNet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 4, 2005 - 12:24 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc_4.patch (1.37 KB)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /includes/common.inc for drupal-4.4.2 version
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/7881
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/7881
Project: Drupal
-Version: 4.5.2
+Version: 4.4.2
Component: base system
-Category: bug reports
+Category: feature requests
Priority: normal
Assigned to: Anonymous
Reported by: jhefmv24
Updated by: jhefmv24
-Status: active
+Status: patch
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc_4.patch (1.37 KB)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /includes/common.inc for drupal-4.4.2 version
jhefmv24
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 19, 2004 - 13:01 : jhefmv24
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc (37.11 KB)
I think the RSS feeds don't work if there is proxy server running. The
request/connection is somehow being blocked.
The connection should be made first to the proxy and once it is
established, then request can made.
I think the core function drupal_http_request() under
/includes/common.inc doesn't support this.
One workaround is change the code from:
<?php
switch ($uri['scheme']) {
case 'http':
//$fp = @fsockopen($uri['host'], ($uri['port'] ? $uri['port']
: 80), $errno, $errstr, 15);
?>
into:
<?php
//use proxy settings
$fp = @fsockopen('proxy2', '8080');
?>
And then create the request by change from:
<?php
$request = "$method $path HTTP/1.0\r\n";
?>
Into:
<?php
$request = "$method ".$uri['scheme']."://".$uri['host'].$path."
HTTP/1.1\r\n";
?>
And comment out the lines:
<?php
$request .= implode("\r\n", $defaults);
?>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 07:38 : Anonymous
Did this ever get taken care of in 4.5.2. I can't seem to get any feed
to work from behind a firewall. Getting error....
Failed to parse RSS feed Microsoft Security Info: 10060 A connection
attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond
after a period of time, or established connection failed because
connected host has failed to respond..
At home this same feed works fine, so I know it's not the feed.
Thanks,
SlackNet
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/7881
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/7881
Project: Drupal
-Version: cvs
+Version: 4.4.2
Component: base system
Category: feature requests
Priority: minor
Assigned to: Anonymous
Reported by: liquidx
Updated by: jhefmv24
Status: patch
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/common.inc_3.patch (1.37 KB)
+1 on having a facility to modify proxy settings...
here's a patch of /includes/common.inc for drupal-4.4.2 version
jhefmv24
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 3, 2004 - 11:39 : liquidx
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/drupal-cvs-20040802-proxy.diff (1.96 KB)
My drupal site is behind a firewall which doesn't allow outgoing port 80
connections except if they go through an http proxy. normally that
doesn't really harm anything, except when i start using XML-RPC or try
to get RSS/Atom feed from other blogs.
So I've written a quick patch to add http_proxy support in conf.php.
I'm not sure whether that is the best place to put it, but if you think
people might want a UI to change that, I could do that. But I suspect
that proxy settings don't change much (its not like you migrate a
drupal web site to different isps everyday :), so conf.php seems like a
good choice.
Cheers,
Alastair Tse
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 3, 2004 - 11:42 : liquidx
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/drupal-cvs-20040802-proxy-v2.diff (1.96 KB)
slight typo in the comment, i never get things right the first time
round :(
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 3, 2004 - 12:13 : Anonymous
HOW TO MAKE 1000'S FROM 6$! READ PLEASE!
How to afford anything you want, no joke! Read, it cant hurt!
READING THIS COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE! AND RICH!
I found this on a bulletin board and decided to try it. A little
while back, I was browsing through newsgroups and came across
an article similar to this that said you could make
thousands of dollars within weeks with only an initial investment of
$6.00! So I thought, "Yeah right, this must be a scam", but
like most of us, I was curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said
that you send $1.00 to each of the 6 names and addresses stated in the
article. You then place your name and address in the bottom of
the list at #6, and post the article in at least 200 newsgroups.
(There are thousands) No catch, that was it. So after thinking it
over, and talking to a few people first, I thought about trying it. I
figured: "what have I got to lose except 6 stamps and $6.00,
right?" Then I invested the measly $6.00. Well GUESS WHAT!!...
within 7 days, I started getting money in the mail! I was shocked? I
figured it would end soon, but the money just kept coming in. In my
first week, I made about $25.00. By the end of the second week I had
made a total of over $1,000.00! In the third week I had over
$10,000.00 and it's still growing. This is now my fourth week and I
have made a total of just over $42,000.00 and it's still coming in
rapidly. It's certainly worth $6.00, and 6 stamps, I have spent more
than that on the lottery!! Let me tell you how this works and most
importantly, why it works... Also, make sure you print a copy of this
article NOW, so you can get the information off of it as you need it.
I promise you that if you follow the directions exactly, that you
will start making more money that you thought possible by doing
something so easy!
Suggestion: Read this entire message carefully! (print it out or
download it.) Follow the simple directions and watch the money
come in!
It's easy. It's legal. And, your investment is only $6.00 (plus
postage).
IMPORTANT: This is not a rip-off; it is not indecent; it is not
illegal; and it is virtually no risk - it really works!!!
IMPORTANT2: The $1.00 for each person on the list is for keeping you
up to date and for putting you in all our newsgroups. So you will
make just as much as we do!!!
If all of the following instructions are adhered to, you will receive
extraordinary dividends.
PLEASE NOTE:
Please follow these directions EXACTLY, and $50,000 or more can be
yours in 20 to 60 days. This program remains successful because of
the honesty and integrity of the participants. Please continue its
success by carefully adhering to the instructions.
You will now become part of the Mail Order business. In this business
your product is not solid and tangible, it's a service. You are in
the business of developing Mailing Lists. Many large corporations are
happy to pay big bucks for quality lists. However, the money made
from the mailing lists is secondary to the income which is made from
people like you and me asking to be included in that list.
Here are the 4 easy steps to success:
STEP 1: Get 6 separate pieces of paper and write the following on
each piece of paper "PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST." Now
get 6 US $1.00 bills and place ONE inside EACH of the 6 pieces of
paper so the bill will not be seen through the envelope (to prevent
thievery). Next, place one paper in each of the 6 envelopes and seal
them. You should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each with a piece of
paper stating the above phrase, your name and address, and a $1.00
bill. What you are doing is creating a service. This is absolutely
legal? You are requesting a legitimate service and you are paying for
it! Like most of us I was a little skeptical and a little worried
about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S.
Post Office (1-800-725-2161) and they confirmed that it is indeed
legal! Mail the 6 envelopes to the following addresses:
1.) GLEN RAY CAMPBELL Jr.
919 Virginia Ct.
Panama City,Fl 32404,usa
2.)Heather Angel
4244 46th St.
San Diego, Ca. 92115
3.) Alexander Dolstra
Frederik Hendrik straat 37
3143 LB Maassluis
the Netherlands
4.) J. Kirk
2360 Forbes Ave.
Santa Clara, CA 95050
5.) N. Hernandez
PO Box 712
Crystal Beach, Fl. 34681, usa
6.)D.Herela
849 La Fayette apt.6-D
El Paso, TX. 79907, usa
STEP 2: Now take the #1 name off the list that you see above, move
the other names up (6 becomes 5, 5 becomes 4, etc. ...) and add YOUR
name as number 6 on the list.
STEP 3: Change anything you need to, but try to keep this article as
close to the original as possible. Now, post your amended article to
at least 200 newsgroups. (I think there are close to 24,000 groups.)
All you need is 200, but remember, the more you post, the more
money you make!
This is perfectly legal! If you have any doubts, refer to Title 18
Sec. 1302 & 1241 of the Postal lottery laws.
Keep a copy of these steps
for yourself and, whenever you need money, you can use it again, and
again.
PLEASE REMEMBER that this program remains successful because of
the honesty and integrity of the participants and by their
carefully adhering to the directions. Look at it this way, if
you are of integrity, the program will continue and the money
that so many others have received will come your way, too.
NOTE: You may want to retain every name and address sent to you,
either on a computer or hard copy and keep the notes people send
you. This VERIFIES that you are truly providing a service. (Also,
it might be a good idea to wrap the $1 bill in dark paper to reduce
the risk of mail theft.)
So, as each post is downloaded and the directions carefully followed,
six members will be reimbursed for their participation as a List
Developer with one dollar each. Your name will move up the list
geometrically so that when your name reached the #1 position you
will be receiving thousands of dollars in CASH!!! What an opportunity
for only $6.00 ($1.00 for each of the first six people listed above).
Send it now, add your own name to the list and you're in business!
---DIRECTIONS----FOR HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS------------------
STEP 1:
You do not need to re-type letter to your own posting. Simply
put your cursor at the beginning of this letter and drag your
cursor to the bottom of this document, and select 'copy' from
the edit menu. This will copy the entire letter into the
computer's memory.
STEP 2:
Open a blank 'notepad' file and place your cursor at the top of
the blank page. From the 'edit' menu select 'PASTE'. This will
paste a copy of the letter into notepad so that you can add your
name to the bottom of the list and to change the numbers of the
list.
STEP 3:
Save your new notepad file as a '.txt' file. If you want to do
your postings in different settings, you'll always have this
file to go back to.
STEP 4:
Use Netscape or Internet Explorer and try search for various
newsgroups (on-line forums, message boards, chat sites,
discussions).
STEP 5:
Visit these message boards and post this article as a new message
by highlighting the text of this letter and selecting 'PASTE'
from the edit menu. Fill in the Subject, this will be the header
that everyone sees as they scroll through the list of postings
in a particular group, click the post message button. You're done
with your first one! Congratulations... That is it! All you
have to do is jump to different newsgroups and post away, after you
get the hang of it, it will take about 30 seconds for each
newsgroup! ** REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST IN, THE MORE
MONEY YOU WILL MAKE!! BUT YOU HAVE TO POST A MINIMUM OF 200**
That is it! You will begin receiving money form
around the world within
days! You may eventually want to rent a P.O.
Box due to the large amount
of mail you will receive. If you wish to
stay anonymous, you can invent
a name to use, as long as the postman will deliver it.
**JUST MAKE SURE ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.**
Now the WHY part:
Out of 200 postings, say I receive only 5 replies (a very low
example). So then I made $5.00 with my name at #6 on the letter.
Now, each of the 5 persons who just sent me $1.00 make the MINIMUM 200
postings, each with my name at #5 and only 5 persons respond to
each of the original 5, this is an additional $25.00 for me.
Now those 25 each make 200 MININUM posts with my name at #4 and only 5
replies each. This brings in an additional $125.00. Now, those 125
persons turn around and post the MINIMUM 200 with my name at #3
and receive 5 replies each, I will make an additional $625.00.
Ok, now here is the fun part, each of those 625 people post a MINIMUM
200 letters with my name at #2 and they receive 5 replies each. That
just made me $3,125.00!!! Those 3,125 persons will all deliver this
message to 200 newsgroups with my name at #1 and if still 5 persons
per 200 react, I will receive an additional $15,625.00!! With an
investment of only $6.00! AMAZING! When your name is no longer
on the list, you just take the latest posting in the newsgroups,
and send out another $6.00 to names on the list, putting your name at
number 6 again. And start posting again. The thing to remeber
is: do you realize that thousands of people all over the world are
joining the internet and reading these articles everyday? JUST
LIKE YOU are now!! So, can you afford $6.00 and see if it really
works?? I
think so... People have said, "what if the plan is played out and no
one sends you the money? So what! What are the chances of that
Happening when there are tons of new honest users and new honest
people who are joining the internet and newsgroups everyday and
are willing to give it a try? Anyway, it is only $6.00 for a chance
at thousands. Estimates are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users, every
day, with thousands of those joining the actual internet.
Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will really work. You
wouldn't want someone to cheat you the same way you may be cheating!
HOW TO MAKE 1000'S FROM 6$! READ PLEASE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 4, 2004 - 16:54 : TDobes
This seems like a possibly useful patch for those stuck in an
environment where they must use a proxy. (intranets?) I have no proxy
set up at the moment with which to test, but +1 to the functionality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 3, 2004 - 19:47 : Steven
If we use HTTP/1.1 (using the Host header), I think we can send exactly
the same request to both a proxy and the real server. It might make the
code a bit cleaner.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 26, 2005 - 12:01 : Steve Stock
That's correct, HTTP/1.1 explicitly requires servers to accept an
absolute URI in the request-line (which of course proxies already
require). See
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.1.2 for
details. Note: a host header is still required.
The drawback is all HTTP/1.1 applications must be able to accept the
chunked transfer coding, see
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec4.html#sec4.4 (third
paragraph above section 4.5). I don't know if Drupal supports this
(doesn't look like it).
While not as nice, for now it appears simpler to implement a proxy
along the lines of this patch. My only suggestion would be to add a
proxy section to the settings page instead of hardcoding the proxy
host/port.
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/9706
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/9706
Hi!
I'd suggest putting this into the Drupal.org handbook. While hacking a
Drupal module is fun, using command line cvs is definitely not. Here is
some help learned the hard way (thanks Killes!):
If you would like to add a file or a directory, it is the parent directory
you need. Once again: the parent directory, not the dir you want to add
something to but the parent of it. I can not find any logic in this, but
this is so.
First, issue a
export CVSROOT=:d:icvslogin:cvspasswd@cvs.drupal.org:/cvs/drupal-contrib
You would like to add a new file to a module?
cvs co contributions/modules/modulename
cd contributions/modules
copy file into modulename
cvs add modules/filename
cvs commit
Say you want to create a sandbox named ihatecvs. Then do a
cvs co contributions/sandbox/weblinks (does not really matter which
directory, I like this one, 'cos it is small)
cd contributions
mkdir sandbox/ihatecvs
put some stuff into the directory sandbox/ihatecvs
cvs add sandbox/ihatecvs
cvs commit
Regards
Karoly Negyesi
Project: Drupal
-Version: 4.5.0
+Version: 4.5.2
Component: aggregator.module
Category: feature requests
Priority: normal
Assigned to: Anonymous
Reported by: geeknews
Updated by: antipasto
-Status: active
+Status: patch
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/drupal_452_rss20.tar.gz (35.63 KB)
Here's a patch for 4.5.2, but this will be implemented way better in
4.6:
http://writtorrent.sourceforge.net/2005/02/rss-20-feeds-with-enclosures-for…
antipasto
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 31, 2005 - 15:32 : geeknews
The aggregator should be able to parse the enclosure information out of
RSS 2.0 feeds. It should be implemented to recognize and display the
links to enclosures. If you want to 1 up the competition add the code
to determine standard file types mp3, wma, ogg, etc and place a
download Icon within the aggregated content.
I have donated and would be willing to help out more to see something
like this implemented.
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/16485
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/16485
Project: Drupal
Version: cvs
Component: node system
Category: tasks
Priority: normal
Assigned to: killes(a)www.drop.org
Reported by: killes(a)www.drop.org
Updated by: killes(a)www.drop.org
Status: patch
@Junyor: Thanks, that's a good sign. Maybe somebody else has an older db
to try.
@robertDouglass: The first effect you describe is due to drupaldevs
running on PHP 5. I am unsure why the second thing does not work. In
node_save() the node object has a nid although there is none in the
form. Very strange.
I've enabled display of db queries on the testsite.
killes(a)www.drop.org
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 5, 2004 - 17:25 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Currently all node revisions are stored in a serialized field in
node.table and retrieved for _each_ page view although they are rarely
needed. However, we have agreed that serializing data is bad and that
we should try to keep the memory foot print pf Drupal small.
Therefore I propose to create a separate revisions table which would be
in principle identical to the node table, only that it could have
several old copies of the same node. Extra data added by other modules
could be added in a serialized field unless we find a better solution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 5, 2004 - 18:06 : jhriggs
I too think the serialized approach is less than desirable, but here's
an alternative. This would likely take some considerable rework in
core and contrib, but the following is how we handle similar types of
situations in our databases at work. It is more elegant that a
separate table, and avoids the (almost exact) duplication of a table.
Instead of separate tables, keep all revisions of nodes in the node
table as follows:
* add field: active (0/1 or Y/N)
* add field: revision
* every revision of a node is stored in the node table; however, only
one revision can be active at any given time
* nid can no longer be unique -- primary/unique key becomes (nid,
active)
* any time a node is loaded, updated (without revision), etc., the
active version is used.
Thoughts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 5, 2004 - 18:57 : killes(a)www.drop.org
I am not opposed to your scheme, but I want to stress the following:
* Duplicating a table's structure is not bad (IMHO) as long as the
content is different.
* having two tables will allow us to have a rather small node table.
This is (maybe) a performance gain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 5, 2004 - 19:37 : jhriggs
I don't necessarily think that duplicating a table's structure is _bad_.
It just seems to be wasteful and a pain to maintain. (Every change to
the node table is made twice...easy to do, but also easy to miss
perhaps.)
As for performance, as long as nid and the active indicator are
indexed, there shouldn't be any performance loss. Also, archiving an
old version when making a new revision will be much simpler: just
change the active indicator rather than copying an entire node to
another table (and ensuring everything gets copied...again a potential
maintainance issue).
To be honest, I would just like to see the serialized data go away,
regarless of what approach is taken.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 30, 2004 - 20:49 : Nick Nassar
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/Drupal-Improved_Revision_Schema_07-30-2004.p… (10.47 KB)
I'm interested in using Drupal for a large scale wiki-type project. In
order to do this, I need revisions to be in their own table.
Attached is a patch to do just that. Most of the changes are pretty
self explanatory. Spreading out node data across two tables meant that
I had to add database functions to do locking/transactions. Without
this, race conditions in which the database becomes corrupted are
possible.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 30, 2004 - 20:54 : Nick Nassar
Oh yeah... The patch is a diff against Drupal CVS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 2004 - 01:00 : Anonymous
Gerhard speaking.
Nick, thanks a lot for your nice patch! It saves me a great deal of
labour. I looked through it and immediately liked it. You not only put
the old revisions into a new table but also the current one. Do you
have an estimate how much more expensive the additional join is?
Besides a few minor coding style issues I found a major one: Just a few
hours before you uploaded your patch JonBob's node access patch hit
core. That means your patch won't apply anymore as all the queries you
change have been changed. Can I bug you to update your patch?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 2004 - 02:11 : Anonymous
Also I think that your upgrade path loses existing revisions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 2004 - 03:39 : drumm
I think this is the proper way to do things. No columns are duplicated,
there is no serialized data, and only the fields that are logically
revised are stored. Nothing jumped out at me as a way to have my node
modules be able to keep a table of revisions of additional fields. I'm
guessing this could be done within the confines of _insert and _update.
Assuming the upgrade path works and modules can extend it I give it a
+1.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 2004 - 15:40 : Nick Nassar
It figures that just as I finish a big patch, another patch comes along
and breaks it. Oh well, it should be a pretty easy to fix. I'll work on
it.
Fixing the upgrade path to keep revisions should be fairly painless.
I found another issue that needs to be fixed before this patch gets
merged. There format of a node needs to be stored for each revision.
Otherwise, for modules that store a format for the nodes, such as page
and book, if you write one revision in PHP and the next in HTML, the
PHP revision will be displayed as HTML. This is part of a larger issue
of how node modules should store revisions of additional fields. I
think each module that wants to do this should create another table
with (nid, revid) as the primary key. Just as when they want to add
fields to a node they create another table with nid as the primary key.
As far as performance goes, for sites that make heavy use of revisions,
an extra join on primary keys is going to be a lot faster than grabbing
all of the revisions from that database everytime. We would need to run
benchmarks to determine is the overall difference in speed is for an
average site is a gain or a loss. I'm guessing it's very minor either
way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 23, 2004 - 14:55 : Nick Nassar
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/Drupal-Improved_Revision_Schema_08-23-2004.p… (10.92 KB)
Here's an updated patch against CVS that puts revisions in their own
table, provides an upgrade path, and fixes the format related bugs in
the last patch.
Hopefully, this can make it into CVS as soon as the freeze is over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 23, 2004 - 15:10 : moshe weitzman
Interesting patch ... drumm's question is still outstanding. how do
modules store revisions of their fields? Are they expected to manage
this on their own? Thats not how it works today.
As an aside, i am seeing profile_ fields in my node.revisions column.
One could argue that those need not be saved. They pertain to the node
author, not to the node itself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 23, 2004 - 17:14 : Nick Nassar
Having modules be responsible for storing revisions of their own fields
is a side-effect of storing revision data in tables. There's really no
way around it. However, revisions generally don't make sense for node
types that don't have PHP/HTML content, such as polls. I think it's
going to be a pretty rare scenario for a new node type to want another
field to change per-revision, so it's a pretty good trade-off.
Storing fields that shouldn't be part of revisions, such as the
profile_ fields, is a side-effect of storing revisions as serialized
objects. Applying this patch will free up that wasted space. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 23, 2004 - 18:20 : Anonymous
There should be a hook that let's the module choose whether it supports
history. This way a module author can prevent the user from doing
something that may break his module or just cause undefined behavior.
If the module doesn't support history then don't let the user/admin
choose to add history to nodes of that type.
Craig
------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 23, 2004 - 20:23 : Nick Nassar
I agree, there should be an API change to make specifying support for
revisions easier. In the interests of keeping patches small and keeping
to one change per patch, I think the API change should be a separate
issue.
A sort of ad-hoc API to decide whether or not a module supports
revisions by default already exists. Instead of having a hook, modules
set the default value of the "Create new revision" field in the edit
form. The admin can change this option in
admin/node/configure/defaults. This patch doesn't change that.
Revisions are broken for node types that have their own database
structure, like polls, even when storing them as serialized objects.
This patch doesn't change that, either.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 26, 2004 - 03:35 : moshe weitzman
I'm guessing that someone is going to have to demonstrate that this
patch performs as well as current drupal before it gets comitted. i
think this patch is a few benchmarks from being comitted.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 27, 2004 - 02:04 : Nick Nassar
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/Drupal-Improved_Revision_Schema_10-26-2004.p… (11 KB)
I ran some really unscientific benchmarks, and it looks like this patch
has a negligible affect on performance.
I used apache bench and the database from theregular.org, which doesn't
contain any revisions (worst case scenario for this patch) and contains
several hundred nodes. Both the patched and unpatched versions hovered
between 2.36 and 2.38 requests per second.
The command I used was:
ab -n50 -C 'PHPSESSID=b01a9f92880ef215b0ed6f1314a5eba2'
http://192.168.0.100/
An updated patch that should apply to CVS is attached.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 27, 2004 - 02:05 : Nick Nassar
I ran some really unscientific benchmarks, and it looks like this patch
has a negligible affect on performance.
I used apache bench and the database from theregular.org, which doesn't
contain any revisions (worst case scenario for this patch) and contains
several hundred nodes. Both the patched and unpatched versions hovered
between 2.36 and 2.38 requests per second.
The command I used was:
ab -n50 -C 'PHPSESSID=b01a9f92880ef215b0ed6f1314a5eba2'
http://192.168.0.100/
An updated patch that should apply to CVS is attached.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 27, 2004 - 02:05 : Nick Nassar
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/Drupal-Improved_Revision_Schema_10-26-2004.p… (11 KB)
I ran some really unscientific benchmarks, and it looks like this patch
has a negligible affect on performance.
I used apache bench and the database from theregular.org, which doesn't
contain any revisions (worst case scenario for this patch) and contains
several hundred nodes. Both the patched and unpatched versions hovered
between 2.36 and 2.38 requests per second.
The command I used was:
ab -n50 -C 'PHPSESSID=b01a9f92880ef215b0ed6f1314a5eba2'
http://192.168.0.100/
An updated patch that should apply to CVS is attached.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 15, 2004 - 06:05 : elias1884
please overthink the revision system default workflow as well. don't
look at the revision system as an isolated system but as a part of the
whole workflow system!
if you combine revisions with the moderation queue the most logic
default workflow would be like that:
auth user creates node (revision #0)
admin approves the node (status = 1, moderation = 0)
=> node publicly available
auth user finds typo and changes node (revision #1, status = 0,
moderation = 1)
-------
what happens at that point at the moment is, that the node is not
accessible anymore at all until the new revision is approved by admin.
of course the new revision should not go online until reviewed and
approved, this is absolutely correct, but there is no reason to not
take the old revision offline, since it was already approved and should
therefore be online until the new revision is approved. it is not
practical if a node disappears only because the author corrected a
typo.
-------
admin approves the node (status = 1, moderation = 0)
eventhough I first thought a plain boolean active field would not be
capable of providing that functionality if finally came to the
conclusion, that it can. The only thing to do is to not set that bit,
when a new revision is created, but when it is approved (in case
moderation is activated under default workflow). Every revision should
have its own moderation, status and active field and on approval they
are set like this (status=1, moderation=0, active=Y).
When you wanna rollback to an old revision, you can chose between all
revisions that already have the moderation bit set back to 0 again and
the published to 1. There should be an extra permission for rollback!
another concern that I have about the default workflow is, that users
can't see the content, they have just created, when moderation is
enabled. Eventhough, there is a big fat "submission accepted" presented
after submissions, unexperienced users tend to question the information
those stupid tincans give them, if they can't find their content
afterwards. Many users are really lazy bastards and they don't even
read the status messages. The best feedback about whether his story was
submitted successfully or not of course is, if he can find the story
somewhere on the site, maybe with a status message on top of it,
mentioning, that the content is currently not publicly available since
it has not been approved yet. there should be a my content section
under my account, like somebody is trying to do with the workspace
module I guess.
so my suggestion is to make (status=0, moderation=1) still available
for the creator under a my content section somewhere!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 24, 2004 - 05:21 : Nick Nassar
I agree. The current workflow for moderation queues and revisions needs
to change, but this patch isn't the place for it. The patch is already
too big, and it only does the backend stuff.
Instead of adding more to this patch and making it take even longer to
get into core, would you mind creating a new issue for your UI
suggestions, so the those changes can be added as a separate patch?
Thanks,
Nick
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 11, 2004 - 13:26 : Dries
This patch is _much_ needed so I'd love to see someone revive it. In
order for this patch to be accepted, the following needs to be done:
Update this patch to CVS HEAD.
Rename revid to vid.
Rename node_rev to node_revisions.
Rename node_rev.changed to node_revisions.timestamp.
Rename $rnode to $revision.
Fix the coding style to match Drupal's: proper spacing, single quotes
where possible, proper variable names.
Benchmark this patch with a large database with enough revisions. I'd
be happy to benchmark this on my local copy of the drupal.org database.
The book.log field should probably move to the node_revisions table.
This can be done in a separate patch.
Investigate whether transactions are well-supported.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 13, 2004 - 01:25 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/Drupal-Improved_Revision_Schema_10-26-2004-r… (11.02 KB)
I've worked a bit on the patch (coding style issues as mentioned by
Dries). One thing I noticed is that the patch uses REPLACE. IIRC this
needs to be chagned to "UPDATE, if fail INSERT" for pgsql
compatibility.
Nick, are you still interested in working on that patch? I'd like to
know how it works on your site and work on getting it into core.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 13, 2004 - 13:33 : Dries
Gerhard: your patch does not apply.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 13, 2004 - 18:10 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Yes, I know, that was the same version as I mailed to you earlier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 13, 2004 - 22:02 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions.patch (52.96 KB)
Ok, upüdated the patch to cvs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 14, 2004 - 09:58 : Dries
Some more comments:
db_begin_transaction() and db_end_transaction() do not belong in
database.inc, but in database.mysql.inc and database.pgsql.inc
respectively.
The node module calls node_revisionsision_list() which is not defined.
(Fxed that on my local copy.)
Do db_begin_transaction() and db_end_transaction() deprecate Jeremy's
table locking patch?
The upgrade path assigns the wrong user ID to each revision.
The upgrade path assigns the wrong date to each revision (that or a
node's revision page shows the wrong usernames/dates).
The coding style needs a bit of work, but we can worry about that
later.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 14, 2004 - 18:34 : Nick Nassar
If you need any help getting those things fixed, just let me know.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 14, 2004 - 18:50 : Nick Nassar
How this relates to Jeremy's node locking patch:
There was lots of discussion, and node locking was decided against
because from an end user point of view you never want a node to be
locked. He's now advocating for a much simpler patch that warns users
if their changes will overwrite someone elses. That patch still has a
race condition, which might be fixed using db_begin_transaction().
http://drupal.org/node/6025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 14, 2004 - 23:26 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_0.patch (55.96 KB)
Here is an updated patch that tries to address Dries concerns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 15, 2004 - 09:32 : Dries
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions-bug.png (76.06 KB)
It didn't fix the aforementioned bugs. See attached screenshot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 6, 2005 - 21:15 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_1.patch (51.77 KB)
Ok, here is a new version. Dries and myself worked hart at it, so please
have a look.
what is still missing
- database upgrades for the core modules with an own table
- contrib modules need an upgrade too.
- do we need nid and vid in both the node and the node_revisions table?
- the amount of sql queries means a good stress testing for large
databases.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 19, 2005 - 22:43 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_2.patch (49.49 KB)
Here is an updated patch. We discussed to keep the current title in node
module and also in the revisiosn table. This is content duplication but
will save many joins as many queries only need the title of a node.
Discussion is welcome.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 20, 2005 - 00:33 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_3.patch (29.93 KB)
I've implemented the aforementioned solution. This makes the patch much
smaller. The patch now also removes taxonomy_node_has_term() which
wasn't used anywhere. I'd really apprciate if some people could test
drive the patch. It will be another huge improvement for 4.6.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 20, 2005 - 01:05 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_4.patch (30 KB)
Another revision. Steven didn't like my literal $node->vid in queries.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 20, 2005 - 02:10 : killes(a)www.drop.org
- database upgrades for the core modules with an own table
- contrib modules need an upgrade too.
- do we need nid and vid in both the node and the node_revisions table?
- the amount of sql queries means a good stress testing for large
databases.
These issues are still open, btw. Especially the first one needs to be
tackled.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 25, 2005 - 21:11 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_5.patch (51.13 KB)
Here is a patch that has the database tables updated for forum, book,
and page module.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 29, 2005 - 23:55 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_6.patch (49.18 KB)
Yet another update to keep it working with head. The patch now also
removes the table definitons for the page table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 29, 2005 - 23:57 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_7.patch (55.69 KB)
Sorry, that was the old version, this is the right one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 31, 2005 - 20:55 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_8.patch (55.71 KB)
Updated once more.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 31, 2005 - 21:52 : Dries
Anyone to help review/test this?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 31, 2005 - 22:22 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_9.patch (49.29 KB)
Updated again, the update functions occurred twice. Thanks Bart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 01:27 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Don't know if the db I am using is corrupted or what. I still do have
some didficulties.
The latest patch is attached.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 01:27 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_10.patch (49.67 KB)
I am probably slowly going mad ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 02:54 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_11.patch (48.95 KB)
The update issue still needs investigating. This patch is updated for
cvs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 21:20 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_12.patch (49.83 KB)
Ok, here is a new version. I've solved my troubles with book.module.
There are still some issues with forum module. Possibly due to
inconsistent database.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 2, 2005 - 22:31 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_13.patch (49.83 KB)
Turns out the drupal.org database had indeed some quirks. Please run
this query in your oldest db and tell me the result:
select nid,type from node where type like '%/%';
If you get a non-zero result we might need to add another security
update.
The patch could use still more testing, though.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2005 - 02:16 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_14.patch (49 KB)
Ok, we are getting somewhere. At a first glance the update is working.
There is a problem remaining: the revisions tab will be shown whether
the node has revisions or not. Not sure we can/need to fix this.
People with a drupal.org account can log in at
http://killes.drupaldevs.org/revision/ and poke around. Your
permissions will be the same as on drupal.org. Feel free to vreak
everything but don't forget to file complaints here. (Note: this is
only a pruned version of the drupal.org database with all project nodes
and nodes with nids > 7000 dropped).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2005 - 05:19 : killes(a)www.drop.org
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/revisions_15.patch (52.39 KB)
There was some error in node_save and also the patches to the
database.inc files got lost...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2005 - 08:07 : robertDouglass
Submitting book pages doesn't work on your test site. It puts the entire
content of the preview inside the body textarea. I wrote a sentence in
the body and the log, and pressing preview put several lines of HTML
containing both sentences in the body textarea on the preview page,
plus the book page wouldn't submit.
-R
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2005 - 08:50 : Junyor
0 results here. I started using Drupal with version 4.4, though.
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/7582
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/7582
Project: Drupal
Version: cvs
Component: book.module
Category: bug reports
Priority: normal
Assigned to: moshe weitzman
Reported by: moshe weitzman
Updated by: Anonymous
Status: patch
+1... the node_access fix is much-needed and the revision pending
indicator would certainly be helpful on drupal.org and other sites
using the moderation system.
Anonymous
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 31, 2005 - 02:41 : moshe weitzman
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/tree.diff (921 bytes)
Book pages slighty disobey the node_access system because they always
return a value for book_access('update'). This simple patch causes us
to use node_access when the user has a chance of being able to update
the current page.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2005 - 16:34 : moshe weitzman
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/book_25.patch (882 bytes)
i had the conditions reversed. thanks jonbob.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2005 - 17:36 : sulleleven
i noticed this a while back... thnx for the patch.
would a similar reason apply to the project modules issue nodes?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2005 - 18:11 : moshe weitzman
Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/book_26.patch (1.37 KB)
this version adds a 'revision pending' message as needed at bottom of
the node view. the lack of this indicator confuses authors on
drupal.org why they have no edit tab, and may remind recent editors why
their edits are not showing up yet.
sorry for mixing two unrelated ideas in one patch. at least they affect
the same single file
--
View: http://drupal.org/node/16462
Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/16462
