It's been my limited experience that if you have a failure in your
datafile, you may need to make adjustments to all your records in the
batch; good records and bad records.  That they should have been
entered as a group.  So, if one record fails, you'll likely still want
the entire datafile to fail, but seperate the failed records so that
you can track down the error(s) quickly.


--- Daniel Kunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Thanks. Great.
> 
> Just to be sure I've communicated what I had in mind clearly, I'll
> say I
> didn't think you'd ever retry the good records...  as they shouldn't
> need to be retried because they've made it into the database.
> However,
> Saving the good records somewhere  is a good idea since someone is
> bound
> to get bit from a "disappearing" import. Perhaps the best solution is
> to
> write them to a new file, *.xml.done as each record is successfully
> imported. Anyway, I think you got the main jist...  widdle down the
> import so it's easy to find and fix those nagging leftover imports
> that
> fail.
> 
> Daniel
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 20:11 -0800, Chris Howe wrote:
> > Daniel,
> > 
> > I like it.  In addition maybe have an option to write the good
> records
> > to one file and the bad records to another...Follow Andrew's recent
> > counting pattern and retry both files with the good ones first.
> I'll
> > probably put some time away for it next weekend.
> > 
> > 
> > --- Daniel Kunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > Chris...
> > > 
> > > Another way I've thought about doing this is to "distructively
> widdle
> > > down" a directory import.
> > > 
> > > The idea is to load as many records as possible into the
> database,
> > > and
> > > delete them from the import directory as they are imported. The
> > > system
> > > already does this on a file level, but I was thinking that doing
> it
> > > on a
> > > record level would take care of all your issues, and leave
> someone
> > > with
> > > a much smaller mess to clean up with the "hopefully few" records
> that
> > > are left that have problems.
> > > 
> > > Optionally going another step... It would be great if it even
> could
> > > handle "circular references." An implementation scheme that might
> > > work
> > > would do it by working backwards, moving each single record that
> > > causes
> > > a problem to a new directory to be re-attempted the next
> iteration.
> > > Hopefully, when you the right combination of problem records are
> > > removed, the circular reference will be accepted in one lump
> commit.
> > > 
> > > Daniel
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 14:23 -0800, Chris Howe wrote:
> > > > The error is most likely on this side of the keyboard, but the
> > > > dummy-fks didn't work for me going from mysql to postgres. 
> Even
> > > with
> > > > it ticked, postgres got mad about referential integrity.  I
> didn't
> > > dig
> > > > into it any further, that's going to be one of the things I do
> look
> > > > into when i set aside some time.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm just thinking abstractly, wouldn't something like the
> following
> > > > work for writing to the correct order
> > > > 
> > > > Start with a HashSet
> > > > 
> > > > Get Record
> > > > If has parent 
> > > >   get parent
> > > >   Is parent in Hashset?
> > > >   yes->write record
> > > >   no-> does parent have parent?
> > > >   ..etc
> > > > If does not have parent
> > > >   write record
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- "David E. Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Mar 1, 2007, at 1:57 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 2. Data write/load order for hierarchy fk integrity
> (parent*Id
> > > ->
> > > > > *Id)
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I think 2 can be addressed pretty well (of course not 100%
> fool
> > > > > proof)
> > > > > > if the output file is written in the right order.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is actually not possible to do, ie sorting a graph with
> > > loops is
> > > > >  
> > > > > NP-hard.
> > > > > 
> > > > > That is why we have the dummy-fks thing, which of course
> should
> > > ONLY 
> > > > > 
> > > > > be used for a case like this where you are sure that there
> are no
> > > bad
> > > > >  
> > > > > fk records.
> > > > > 
> > > > > -David
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Daniel
> > > 
> > > *-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-
> > > Have a GREAT Day!
> > > 
> > > Daniel Kunkel           [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > BioWaves, LLC           http://www.BioWaves.com
> > > 14150 NE 20th St. Suite F1
> > > Bellevue, WA 98007
> > > 800-734-3588    425-895-0050
> > > http://www.Apartment-Pets.com  http://www.Illusion-Optical.com
> > > http://www.Card-Offer.com      http://www.RackWine.com
> > > http://www.JokesBlonde.com     http://www.Brain-Fun.com 
> > > *-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 

Reply via email to