Moving udd away from sqlite

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 7/2/2012 9:36 AM, James Westby wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:29:08 -0400, James Westby
> <james.westby at canonical.com> wrote:
>> I need to do that, as well as some unicode fixes. I'll get those
>> done and up for review by the end of this week.
> 
> Belatedly here they are:
> 
> https://code.launchpad.net/~james-w/udd/storm/+merge/112983 
> https://code.launchpad.net/~james-w/udd/storm-unicode-fixes/+merge/112984
>
> 
https://code.launchpad.net/~james-w/udd/storm-sqlite-db-provider/+merge/112985
> 

I think you used the wrong target. All of those are requests to merge
into lp:~james-w/udd/storm-sqlite

And I think it has already landed there (all of the diffs are empty).


>> I'll then spin up an ec2 instance to run in parallel and do
>> everything except push the branches back, and leave this running
>> over the weekend.
> 
> I spun up three udd instances on ec2, each rigged to not hit 
> codehosting, but to have something like the db access pattern of
> doing imports.
> 
> There was one running tip of trunk, one running the code we tried
> to deploy last time, and one running my current code.
> 
> After leaving them for a weekend grep "database is locked"
> debug_log* gives:
> 
> trunk: 0 old code: 7199 new code: 0
> 
> (with me logging in a couple of times to kill the old code because
> it was in a deadlocked state.)
> 
> which is hopefully good evidence that we should have fewer issues
> this time.

That certainly does look like a good sign.

> 
> The new code also imported roughly the same number of packages as
> trunk in that time, so there doesn't seem to be any large
> performance impact from the changes.
> 
>> Then on Tuesday morning my time (starting 1300 UTC) I'll do a
>> deployment of the code to production if (reviews, ec2) don't show
>> any problems. We can then carefully monitor the service for the
>> next few days.
> 
> I'm ready to do this once the code is reviewed.
> 
> I'll send another email before I do it.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James
> 

Can you re-propose the changes so we can get nice diffs?

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk/xb7gACgkQJdeBCYSNAAPVTgCfbI61H/YueS5NWtVKX7ODtcRQ
b64An0pAfE44N3wHdAs/XvHdO40zg9dI
=3xMA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----