On 15-Jun-06, at 10:21 AM, Alan Dixon wrote:
Conclusion: rather than trying to categorize in detail all the different tables, I'd propose allowing them to be in just three different categories: a. transactional (a good word after all ...) b. content c. configuration
where the default is 'content'. This imaginary script would then:
1. ignore all the log tables 2. interactively allow each of the content tables to be ignored, merged or replaced, after an analysis of the differences. 3. replace all the configuration tables (and save the difference somewhwere as a sql script that could be called to selectively reverse some changes? ah, now it's getting ambitious).
Some problems would occur if you're merging node tables - you'd need to update all the related id's in the modules for example.
Alan -- thanks for this write up. I think the staging/production server issue is one that merits attention. A lot of times, it means we're running without a safety net -- it is too hard to merge (config, content) changes between a dev site and a live site...so lots of people just don't, or do extra work in re-doing the same config steps on a live site. Not sure how to go about this...a few folks need to bang heads about the best way to get this done. -- Boris Mann Vancouver 778-896-2747 San Francisco 415-367-3595 SKYPE borismann http://www.bryght.com