Hi!
Why Google uses branching to such an old version? Aren't the fixed
being backported to latest builds of 5.0.x (there was quite a time
since
5.0.37).
Hehe, it was actually Google people who coined 'four oh forever' (a
nickname for our 4.0.40 build ;-), and now they refer to their
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Dmitriy Sintsov ques...@rambler.ru wrote:
Why Google uses branching to such an old version? Aren't the fixed
being backported to latest builds of 5.0.x (there was quite a time since
5.0.37).
Presumably Google doesn't get all its patches included in mainline
El 5/16/09 2:43 PM, George Herbert escribió:
[snip]
I appreciate what you're saying, but I've been the person who had to clean
up several large environments (much larger than WMF) after they let software
get too old, and it was very much not pretty.
If you're not keeping currentish and
Google have switched to their own 'forever' version for now, based on
5.0.37 iirc :) It is just us!
Why Google uses branching to such an old version? Aren't the fixed
being backported to latest builds of 5.0.x (there was quite a time since
5.0.37).
As for MySQL 6.0, maybe it's worth a dedicated
Hoi,
There are several parts to that question. Typically you upgrade for the
benefit of new functionality, security fixes and performance improvements.
These are all sound reasons why we should upgrade. Reasons why not to
upgrade are prerequisites for the upgrade are not in place, the logistics
George,
Eventually, supportability and bugfixes for newer versions surpass
those for
older versions.
True, though we don't hit bugs too much in 4.0, it is somewhat
rocksolid for us.
Eventually not going for 5.4 will be bad situation (once innodb plugin
1.0.3 features get merged in, e.g.
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.comwrote:
George,
Eventually, supportability and bugfixes for newer versions surpass
those for
older versions.
True, though we don't hit bugs too much in 4.0, it is somewhat
rocksolid for us.
Eventually not going for 5.4
Why was this approach opposed?
I am working on Oracle abstraction at the moment and i was planning to
implement such a function.
DJ Bauch wrote:
I would much rather see a function added at the Database
class level to form compound queries from subqueries, since the
alternative is to introduce
2009/5/16 Freako F. Freakolowsky fr...@drajv.si:
Why was this approach opposed?
I am working on Oracle abstraction at the moment and i was planning to
implement such a function.
DJ Bauch wrote:
I would much rather see a function added at the Database
class level to form compound queries
On Thu, 14 May 2009 15:18 +0300, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
Are there any disadvantages that would result from doing work on
using a
database abstraction layer such as Adodb? Or advantages that are
gained
from the current methods of accessing databases.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 6:48 AM, Karun Dambiec ka...@fastmail.fm wrote:
From looking further into ADODB, it appears that the performance hit
from using it could be significant for projects like Wikipedia (14% or
so from the statistics on the ADODB site).
14% over what? For trivial queries
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:45 -0400, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 6:48 AM, Karun Dambiec ka...@fastmail.fm wrote:
From looking further into ADODB, it appears that the performance hit
from using it could be significant for projects like Wikipedia
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Karun Dambiec ka...@fastmail.fm wrote:
The first benchmark is a synthetic one that does not measure
live performance. This benchmark tries to be more realistic,
measuring HTTP requests/second. In this test, we select and
display 82 rows from the products table
Hi!
MySQL 5.x have been out for a very long time now. 3.5 years of
production
stable release for 5.0.
Oh! Time flies fast.
Domas, I assume you're still on this list - can you give us some
background
why we're not on a closer to current release MySQL within the WMF
environments?
2009/5/15 George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com:
Domas, I assume you're still on this list - can you give us some background
why we're not on a closer to current release MySQL within the WMF
environments?
Upgrading for the sake of upgrading is always a bad idea. The question
should also be
I already run Mediawiki on ADODB (see bug 9767 over at Bugzilla) and
concur with what I see as the intent of the start of this thread. As I
began to move from 1.14 to 1.15, I noted a problem with
Special:RecentChanges and Special:RecentChangesLinked that are
characterized in that message (i.e.,
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Karun Dambiec ka...@fastmail.fm wrote:
From searching the mailing list archives, I have found that Database.php
does things relating to generating queries, and not just abstraction of
the
17 matches
Mail list logo
