z at mzmcbride
Jun 14, 2012, 7:50 PM
Post #4 of 4
Antoine Musso wrote:
> Le 07/06/12 17:00, Krinkle a écrit :
>> On Jun 7, 2012, at 4:15 PM, John wrote:
>>> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28339 has been just sitting
>>> their stale for quite a while. I know as a toolserver user, that there is a
>>> potential for a lot of useful tools. Who do I need to bribe or murder in
>>> order to facilitate this process?
>> This is not as easy as setting up replication for other databases, because
>> it is set up differently and there are special privacy matters to think of.
>> Meanwhile, may I remind that BugZilla actually does have an API,
>> which is also accessible from the Toolserver.
>> It is a little complicated to use, but provides a lot of features.
> I think we should have people use the API instead of setting up a
> database replication. That would mean closing bug 28339 as a wontfix /
> use API instead.
I don't see how the API and database replication are comparable.
I want to be able to do things such as aggregate all (open) bugs by creation
date. Or maybe output reports of all bugs by creation date. Using SQL, this
is trivial. And I can easily take the individual pieces of data (bug
summary, bug status, ID, creation date, etc.) and manipulate them in
creative and interesting ways. Using the API, on the other hand, is a
complete pain in the ass. I still don't really understand how to access it
and get it to return useful data, and even I did, I don't want to poll it
dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of times to get the data. It's a
complete waste of time. I could poll it a bunch of times and then store the
data locally for quick lookup/retrieval, but then I'm just making a second
database... which is brain-dead given the fact that MySQL supports
replication (with views as access control!).
I looked at the Bugzilla database schema at some point. There are like two
columns that need to be taken out of the views for its tables. Hardly a
large burden. The larger issue, as I recall, was that Bugzilla was on db9,
alongside a lot of other databases that people weren't keen on seeing
replicated. I don't think this is still the case, though.
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists