Hi,
There is no reason that compels you to use a table prefix. You need to use a table prefix only if you want to use the same mysql database for some other applications, or use the same db for different versions of Mediawiki. Even if you use same database for multiple applications, it's not necessary to use a table prefix. A table prefix will only help you while viewing the table names-if you use a prefix, you can see all the mediawiki tables together. Or if you want to export only mediawiki tables using an application like phpMyAdmin from a multi-application database, you can easily select the tables in one go, if they have a prefix. That's it; nothing more.
Regards,
Jack Eapen SunTec Knowledge Centre ---------------------------------------------------------------- "May He protect us both. May He cause us both to enjoy.May we exert together. May our studies become brilliant. May we not hate each other"
-----Original Message----- From: mediawiki-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:mediawiki-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of The Gadget Doctor Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 6:44 PM To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Is there any reason to use a table name prefix ifyou don't have to?
On Feb 5, 2008 2:46 PM, David A. Desrosiers desrod@gnu-designs.com wrote:
Currently all maintenance tasks are hard-coded with the standard table
names. I've run into this and been bitten by it far too many times.
This would seem to be a killer point that I haven't spotted anywhere in the docs (and a bit of a failing!)
Right now I can't seem to get any maintenance scripts to run as I get the following failure:
PHP Fatal error: require_once(): Failed opening required 'counter.php' (include_path='.:') in /var/www/vhosts/xxxxxxx/httpdocs/w/maintenance/update.php on line 2
I'm scouring the web and the archives right now but if anyone knows the answer..... _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
This electronic mail (including any attachment thereto) may be confidential and privileged and is intended only for the individual or entity named above. Any unauthorized use, printing, copying, disclosure or dissemination of this communication may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Accordingly, if you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this email immediately and delete this email (and any attachment thereto) from your computer system...Thank You
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 19:07 +0530, Jack Eapen C wrote:
Even if you use same database for multiple applications, it's not necessary to use a table prefix. A table prefix will only help you while viewing the table names-if you use a prefix, you can see all the mediawiki tables together.
Not quite. Mediawiki has 136 separate tables per-install. If you wanted to use a single-database solution (which certain types of MW install are easier to manage in this fashion), your only option is to use table prefixes.
In my particular case [ http://projects.plkr.org/encycloplucker/ ], I have 9 langauges against 6 wiki projects (books, news, quote, source, etc.) in one database for ease of management (rapid import/export operations).
This brings the total number of tables to a whopping 7,344 if I import them all at once (54 wikis * 136 tables in each).
Without using 54 separate databases (functionally not possible in this case, because I'm using just one instance of the Mediawiki source to host all of these wikis), how do you propose a solution that does not involve table prefixes?
Am Dienstag, den 05.02.2008, 08:53 -0500 schrieb David A. Desrosiers:
Without using 54 separate databases (functionally not possible in this case, because I'm using just one instance of the Mediawiki source to host all of these wikis)
You have 54 different configurations with 54 different table prefixes. You could just as easily have 54 different configurations with 54 different database names, couldn't you?
~ Kilian
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 17:32 +0100, Kilian wrote:
You have 54 different configurations with 54 different table prefixes. You could just as easily have 54 different configurations with 54 different database names, couldn't you?
Not without significant changes to the single source code tree that I'm using to host all of these wikis.
mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org