[geeklog-devel] Draft of schema for GL2

[Tony Bibbs]

Sweet. 

--Tony

dwight at trumbower.com wrote:

>We are fine as long as you don't use foreign key specific functions. LIke
>Cascade deletes and updates. Which it sounds like Propel will handle this.
>myisam will just ignore the ddl for foreign keys.
>
>Dwight
>
>>From MySql:
>In MySQL Server 3.23.44 and up, the InnoDB storage engine supports
>checking of foreign key constraints, including CASCADE, ON DELETE, and ON
>UPDATE. See section 15.7.4 FOREIGN KEY Constraints.
>
>For storage engines other than InnoDB, MySQL Server parses the FOREIGN KEY
>syntax in CREATE TABLE statements, but does not use or store it. In the
>future, the implementation will be extended to store this information in
>the table specification file so that it may be retrieved by mysqldump and
>ODBC. At a later stage, foreign key constraints will be implemented for
>MyISAM tables as well.
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>>I think we are fine.  Why?  Well, if we develop this using foreign keys
>>I think we cover our arses in the case someone doesn't use INNODB.
>>That's because I'm pretty sure that if a MySQL Server that doesn't have
>>INNODB support compiled in and somenoe imports DDL for a database that
>>tries to use INNODB, it will simply convert them to MyISAM and ignore
>>any FOREIGN KEY constraints (as opposed to creating an error and dying).
>>
>>As I said, the Propel classes enforce foreign key constraints natively
>>(assuming the schema.xml is right) so in the MyISAM case we are still
>>covered.  Only exception to this is obviously GL2 programmers can issue
>>raw SQL so there is the possiblity of orphaned children.  But again, if
>>all developers use INNODB the database during coding, we would catch any
>>potential errors regardless.
>>
>>So, in short, I don't think MyISAM users will be effected.  Of course
>>someone will need to test this...
>>
>>If I am right (which I'm pretty sure I am), we will want to put a stern
>>warning about the possible effects of not using INNODB.  Also, this make
>>the table-locking issue more complicated since we have to cover the
>>MyISAM side of things as well.  Or does it?  Table locking should only
>>occur on high traffic sites and, IMHO, you get what you get for using
>>MyISAM on a wildly popular website.
>>
>>--Tony
>>
>>dwight at trumbower.com wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Moving to INNODB is moving closer to a real DBMS and requires more
>>>
>>>administration. For one, you can't do backups unless you take the
>>>database
>>>off line or spend $500 for a product. I don't see ISP switching. Most
>>>can't handle standard mysql properly.
>>>
>>>I found this out when Dirk started making GL 1.3.x default to innodb. He
>>>changed it back to myisam with an option to make it innodb.
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't have a problem with forcing INNODB, just bringing up issues as I
>>>see them. The target user for GL2 will be much smaller than it is today.
>>>
>>>Dwight
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>geeklog-devel mailing list
>>>geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net
>>>http://lists.geeklog.net/listinfo/geeklog-devel
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>geeklog-devel mailing list
>>geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net
>>http://lists.geeklog.net/listinfo/geeklog-devel
>>
>>    
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>geeklog-devel mailing list
>geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net
>http://lists.geeklog.net/listinfo/geeklog-devel
>  
>