On Sep 26, 2004, at 1:23 PM, Kate Turner wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 13:20:16 -0700, Brion Vibber
<brion(a)pobox.com>
wrote:
On Sep 26, 2004, at 1:13 PM, Jens Frank wrote:
We shouldn't wait. Waiting will just increase
the costs of changes.
The change is needed, as the previous code was very expensive for
page moves. They have been used several times to kill the wiki.
When you come up with a better transition, we'll see.
It isn't a case of better transition. If you can find a better
transition,
excellent. If not, it _still_ has to be done. Not doing it is not an
option.
I suppose you mean to say it's not a _good_ option. It's not a good
option, but neither is spending much longer in downtime than we need
to. We have an obligation to *keep things running smoothly*; this is
why we've volunteered and this is why Jimmy & the foundation allow us
to play on their expensive equipment which serves an increasingly high
profile FOSS & open content project.
What concerns me is that this was checked in with no discussion and
with no estimates done of how disruptive the upgrade would be, despite
this issue having been discussed before.
A possible alternative which has been brought up before is to avoid
changing the structure of the old table, rather pullings its
non-textual data out to a separate table and continuing to use the old
table (unaltered) as a store for old_text. This avoids copying around
the most data and should in theory be faster.
-- brion vibber (brion @
pobox.com)