db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Satheesh Bandaram <sathe...@Sourcery.Org>
Subject Re: Soft Upgrade and Downgrade
Date Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:05:28 GMT
Good points... Also, if Derby is being embedded in other applications
that provide reverting back to older versions, wouldn't automatic
upgrade of Derby prevent embedded application from reverting? I do think
soft-upgrade is a very useful feature to have, especially for embedded
databases.

Satheesh

Mike Matrigali wrote:

> The way I look at it, derby has a very nice default.  We call it soft
> upgrade, but in my mind it really is "no upgrade".  We guarantee that
> if you do nothing to your existing app, then you can run it and the
> database against your current version of the derby software and all
> future versions of the derby software.  I think this is a reasonable
> "automatic"  default.
>
> Because we provide no way to "go back" with database versions I believe
> it is reasonable to require the very slight user intervention of
> connecting and requiring the upgrade=true flag.  If you want to use new
> stuff then you proactively tell us.  This model is really important if
> we ever decide to do some sort of major data upgrade where the cost
> of hard upgrade may be hours depending on the size of the db and number
> of rows touched.
>
> Oystein Grovlen - Sun Norway wrote:
>
>> I agree that soft upgrade has a value, but I think you give soft
>> upgrade credit for things that are actual not provided by soft
>> upgrade.  More comments below.
>>
>> Kathey Marsden wrote:
>>
>>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>
>>>> 4) What is the customer problem solved by Soft Upgrade?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Soft upgrade solves  many  problems for users , support and
>>> development.  It:
>>>
>>> -  Minimizes end  user intervention in accordance with  Derby's charter
>>> http://db.apache.org/derby/derby_charter.html.
>>>     which calls for ease of use and zero administration for end users.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is not soft upgrade that minimizes end user intervention.  That is
>> provided by automatic upgrade (soft or hard).  In fact, soft upgrade
>> increases user intervention since you will need to explicitly state
>> that you want to do a hard upgrade.  Without soft upgrade, hard
>> upgrades could have been done automatically.
>>
>>> -  Encourages upgrade and reduces the need to port fixes to old
>>> releases.
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree that people will probably be less hesistant to upgrade to new
>> releases if they are able to revert to their old release.  In my
>> opinion, that is the only value of soft upgrade.  In itself, I would
>> not think that using the old data format should make it much less
>> risky to upgrade than using a new data format.  And if I had to
>> downgrade due to problems with the new release, how do I know that
>> this new faulty release has not corrupted my database?
>>
>>> -  Provides applications, embedding  or including Derby  a scalable
>>> deployment option for distributing  new versions of Derby.
>>
>>
>>
>> How is soft upgrade provide more scalable deployment than hard upgrade?
>>
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message