-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 273
Update moz_origins index column order to match desktop #7521
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
shawnz
wants to merge
2
commits into
mozilla:main
Choose a base branch
from
shawnz:shawnz/origins-index-order
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+270
−5
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IIUC, this check is required because previous schema upgrades execute
CREATE_SHARED_SCHEMA_SQLwhich means they might have already ran this upgrade. This seems dangerous to me, since it means wherever that changes we'll need to think through the effects on every upgrade function.How do others feel about copying the v19 version of that SQL into some other module and call it something like
legacy_schemas. The upgrades can uselegacy_schemas::CREATE_SHARED_SCHEMA_SQLand then we can change the realCREATE_SHARED_SCHEMA_SQLwithout needing to worry about that. There's probably a better naming system, but I like freezing the code that the upgrade functions run as much as possible.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i actually put that check here just to better copy what desktop does, which has that same check because of (i think) the possibility of downgrades and re-applications of migrations that have already been applied?
but now that I think about it, you are right. it also defends against the scenario where the unversioned CREATE_SHARED_SCHEMA_SQL already ran with the new definition in an older migration. and I agree, having older migrations apply newer and potentially changing SQL is risky. i will prepare a change with your proposed design based on the contents of CREATE_SHARED_SCHEMA_SQL at the time of
each past migration'smigration 19's commit