DBI and the shadowdb

[Myk Melez]

Bradley Baetz wrote:

>myk, if I produced a replication patch which allowed teh existing 
>shadowdb to be used in parallel, would bmo use it when it upgrades to get 
>request tracker soonish? And would you object if I then removed the 
>fallback support for syncshadowdb soon after?
>
I'm curious what you mean by "in parallel", and doing this gives me some 
work to do as well (reconfiguring the server) that I'm not sure I'll 
have time for before the upgrade, but if I do, and if the replication 
patch went in and looked very good, I would turn it on after upgrade 
regressions were dealt with, and if it worked I wouldn't have any 
problem with removing the shadow database code.  As far as I am 
concerned, good riddance to the shadowdb.

Even if I don't get the server reconfigured before the upgrade, though, 
it's something I can (and will) do afterwards, so working on the 
replication patch isn't a waste of time no matter when I get to the 
reconfiguration.

Btw- Are there any plans to make it possible to install a read-only 
installation of Bugzilla that directs all write requests to another 
installation.  This, along with replication, would provide an quick and 
easy scalability solution (just add more boxes).

-myk