Holger Mueller wrote: > Dan Langille schrieb: > >>> Given the fact that this query actually returns records without order, i >>> will >>> apply your patch, but a better solution would be to build a list that >>> respects >>> the configuration file order and adds old catalog entries. >> Perhaps a switch? Order by configuration file or order by name? > > One problem of ordering by configuration file for restore clients and > filesets that can occour is that the configuration file has been > changed. If a client isn't existent in the configuration anymore > how to order then? Vice versa it's the same.
I just realized: there is no sorting at present in any released version. I suspect, as hinted at previously, the clients are 'sorted' by the order in which they are added to the system. That is, they are not sorted at all. The query has no sort clause. Therefore, the output order is not defined nor can it be guaranteed. It just happens that MySQL chooses to output them in the order in which they were added to the database. A different database engine might choose a different and perhaps random order. My theory: The premise that we are storing in order depending upon the configuration file is not valid. It is a coincidence, not a design intent. In fact, it's not intended at all. Conclusion: while the system gives the illusion that we are sorting, we aren't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
