Bret Baptist wrote: > On Friday 15 February 2008 2:47:57 am Paul J Stevens wrote: >> Bret Baptist wrote: >>> I am attempting to do an upgrade from 1.2.12.1 to the latest 2.2.9. I >>> was able to update the database schema with only a little bit of trouble. >> Define a little trouble. If you did a schema migration like >> 1.2.12.1->2.0.11->2.2.9 you shouldn't have had any problem at all. > > I am running 1.2.12.1 that has been upgraded lots of times since I started > using DBMail around 2002. The tables in use right now are from before the > transition to InnoDB. I manually transitioned to InnoDB at one point, and > then later added the foreign keys. The upgrade script is not able to take > this into account. > > With that in mind I had to make these changes. > > --- migrate_from_1.x_to_2.0_innodb.mysql 2008-02-15 > 16:35:12.000000000 -0600 > +++ dbmail-2.2.9/sql/mysql/migrate_from_1.x_to_2.0_innodb.mysql 2008-02-09 > 06:08:28.000000000 -0600 > @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ > RENAME TABLE users TO dbmail_users; > ALTER TABLE dbmail_users > ADD COLUMN curmail_size bigint(21) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', > -### DROP KEY user_idnr, > + DROP KEY user_idnr, > DROP INDEX useridnr_2, > DROP INDEX userid_2, > ADD INDEX userid_index (userid); > @@ -49,9 +49,7 @@ > # alter mailboxes > RENAME TABLE mailboxes TO dbmail_mailboxes; > ALTER TABLE dbmail_mailboxes > - DROP INDEX mailboxidnr_2, > - DROP INDEX idx_subscribed, > - DROP INDEX idx_owner_idnr, > +## DROP INDEX mailboxidnr_2, > ADD INDEX name_index (name), > ADD INDEX owner_idnr_index (owner_idnr), > ADD UNIQUE INDEX name_owner_idnr_index (owner_idnr, name), > @@ -145,9 +143,7 @@ > # alter messageblks table > RENAME TABLE messageblks TO dbmail_messageblks; > ALTER TABLE dbmail_messageblks > - DROP FOREIGN KEY `0_81`; > -ALTER TABLE dbmail_messageblks > -#### DROP INDEX messageblk_idnr, > + DROP INDEX messageblk_idnr, > DROP INDEX messageblk_idnr_2, > DROP INDEX msg_index, > CHANGE message_idnr physmessage_id bigint(21) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', > >>> However during the "dbmail-util -by" run I am seeing messages like this: >>> >>> Feb 14 10:37:58 bedlam dbmail-util[20253]: Error:[message] >>> dbmail-message.c,dbmail_message_retrieve(+769): retrieval failed for >>> physid [17086931] >>> >>> Should I be concerned? >> Are your foreign key restraints in place? Do a double and triple check. > > All the upgrade scripts succeeded. I checked and the new foreign keys were > all in place. What does this message mean? Is there anything that I can > check related to this message to see if there are any issues with the > migration?
It's probably not the migration then, but rather an inconsistency in the database. I can't tell for sure without level5 logs. Did you test with outlook/tb etc? Does everything look ok from that perspective? -- ________________________________________________________________ Paul Stevens paul at nfg.nl NET FACILITIES GROUP GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31 The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl _______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list DBmail@dbmail.org https://mailman.fastxs.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
