I have set up a RavenDB for evaluation. I wrote some code which pushed some documents into it. I then have a web site which renders those documents.
Throughout the day, I used the Raven Studio to modify some text in those documents, so that I could see the changes come through in my web site.
Problem: It seems that after going home for the night, when I come in the next day my database has changed - my documents have reverted to the 'pre-changed' versions... what's going on??
I've looked through the Raven console output, and there were no update commands issued on my developer machine overnight (nor would I expect there to be!!)
Note: this is just running on my development machine.
As far as I know, RavenDB has no code in it that would automatically undo commited write operations and honestly, this would really scare me. Altogether this sounds really weird and I can't think of a scenario where that could actually happen. I suggest you send the logfiles to ravendb support if it happens again, because this would be a really serious issue.
My colleague had this very problem with updates being reverted. The update we made was to add a property, and then also a document specific value for this property, to all the documents. We called SaveConfiguration() and saw the change being done in the Raven Studio. A while later some of the documents had lost it's new property.
I decided to turn on the logging and therefore added an NLog.config file, to get the logging started I touched the web.config. This of course restarted the application, and "voila", the updates appeared in the Raven Studio again.
After a while they disappeared from the Raven Studio, so I assumed that this was a studio problem. I therefore tried to retrieve the objects from the database in a test controller, unfortunately the objects were lacking the property value here too, so it wasn't just a studio problem.
With the logging turned on we updated the documents of the specific type again, and according to the logs and also the studio we actually updated the documents. Not long thereafter the documents reverted by losing it's added property yet again (my colleague started crying at this point - true story)..
Later I came to realize that this was all because of our live web application still had the old version of the object. When it was read in the web application the data was returned without the extra property. Because of this it seems like our DocumentSession thought that the object had changed (in all fairness), so when we called SaveChanges even these objects was written to the database - without it's extra property.
Is my conclusion correct? What is the solution to this problem? I'm thinking CQRS, because then we will never call "SaveChanges()" on the DocumentSession for reads.
Adam,
Just making sure, did you call SaveChanges() after you made your modifications?
There is absolutely nothing in RavenDB that would cause this behavior.
Related
I'm an extreme newbie to managing TFS, so please bear with me and know I'll need baby steps. I'll try to be as specific as possible.
I recently inherited an MVC ASP.net website written by a former colleague. Generally he would work directly in the production environment and commit changes as he went along. Obviously that's not good practice, so when I received it I decided to set it up in TFS along with a proper testing and development environment. I created the team project collection, added the existing solution to the collection, set up branching and branch hierarchy, and mapped the work environments. From what I can tell it's set up just like our other site that was configured in TFS before I came on (the person who set it up is long gone).
The issue I'm seeing now is that checking in changes don't seem to be affecting the actual code behind the site. Whether I make the changes in the test branch and then check-in/merge changeset with the production branch, or make the changes directly in production, saving and checking in changes doesn't actually affect the site. If I go into solution explorer and look at the files I just edited, my checked-in changes are not there. Same if I edit a web.config or something, I can then open in up in another text editor and my changes are nowhere to be found.
I followed Microsoft's instructions as closely as I could but clearly I missed something, I just have no idea what.
I'm using MigratorDotNet to manage Rails-style migrations for my web app. I have a workflow where, if I delete all the tables in the database, I can access an installation view that will run MigratorDotNet and create all the necessary tables.
This works locally. For some reason, when I upload my code to my Arvixe hosting, the migrations just never run. I get this odd error:
There is already an object named 'SchemaInfo' in the database.
This is odd because, prior to running migrations, I manually deleted all the tables in the database (to make sure it wasn't left over from a previous install).
My code essentially boils down to:
new Migrator.Migrator("SqlServer", connectionString.ToString(), migrationsAssembly).MigrateToLastVersion();
I've already verified by logging that the connection string is correct (production/hosting settings), and the assembly is correctly loaded (name and version).
Works locally, but not on Arvixe. How do I troubleshoot this?
This is a dark day.
It turns out (oddly) that the root cause was my hosting company used a schema other than dbo for my database. Because of this, the error message I saw (SchemaInfo already exists) was talking about their table.
My solution, unfortunately, was to rip out MigratorDotNet and go with FluentMigator instead. not only did this solve the problem, but it also gave me a more intelligible error message (one referring to the schema names).
While it doesn't seem possible to auto-set the schema, and while I need to switch the schema on my dev vs. production machine, it's still a solvable problem (and a better API, IMO). I googled, but did not find any way to change the default schema in migratordotnet.
I'm sorry for the issues that you were having. On shared hosting, unfortunately the only way that we may be able to change the schema is manually. If you are still looking for a solution that requires our assistance, please forward your ticket ID to qa .at. arvixe.com as well as arvand .at. arvixe.com and we can look into the best way to resolve this.
I have a very odd situation in my SharePoint staging environment. We recently stood up a new SharePoint 2010 server (single WFE + a DB server), and attached a backed-up content database from our existing environment. We created a new web application, and pointed it at the attached content database. All of our site collections, sites, lists, etc. appeared, and things appeared good.
We had deployed some custom content types to our existing environment prior to moving the database, and we wanted to upgrade those content types. Specifically, we attach event receivers to the content types (using code, not XML) and we needed to update the assembly version that those event receivers point to. So we ran our usual code (part of a feature receiver) to remove the event receivers, but to our surprise, the receivers remained.
In an attempt to remedy the situation, we wrote a console application that iterates over all content types (SPWeb.ContentTypes) in the root site of each site collection and deletes them, and then calls SPContentType.Update(true) on each content type. There are no errors returned from the call to Update, but again to our even greater surprise, SharePoint still reports the event receivers are attached.
In a desparate last ditch effort, we even went into the content database (after taking a snapshot -- and remember, this is staging, not production!) and manually DELETED the offending receivers from the EventReceivers table. We figured that should have at least some kind of effect. Alas, SharePoint still reports the receivers as being present.
We perform these types of upgrades on content type event receivers all the time, but have never run into this issue on any other SharePoint farm. Does it sound like an environmental problem? Is it something that could have been caused by moving the content database? Any help would be appreciated, because we are completely stumped at this point.
1st of all, I will never recommend changing anything in DB. It will surely give you trouble in long run.
You did mention that you tried to remove the event reciever from Web level but not sure if you have tried removing it from List/Library level
Use ContentTypeUsage class and try deleting from List/Library level
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/microsoft.sharepoint.spcontenttypeusage.aspx
I'm working on an app currently, and was scratching my head thinking that previous versions wasn't working; however it turns out that closing the document window and re-opening after a restore the restored values are now displayed.
The problem arises after performing the restore, the UI simply doesn't reflect that a restore has taken place.
Does anybody know of why this could be / how to fix the issue?
Thanks,
Clint
Have you implemented the required API for restoring the UI state of your windows? If you don't know what I'm talking about, you need to read this section of the documentation.
Turns out, it had nothing to do with the restoreFromCoder etc.
It was where the document object was being stamped over each time, this doesn't update the UI as UI updates a performed when a property is set, thus resulting in the binding being invalidated.
The way I got around this, was by every time it loads from a document, it simply "assimilates" the new document objects values into the existing ones (initialised to defaults in init); this results in the UI updating seamlessly when the user restores.
I'm working on creating a self updating application and one issue I'm running into on Vista and Windows 7 is needing to have admin privileges in order to update the client. I've run into issues with clients that have their users running under restricted permissions and they would have to have IT log onto every machine that needed to update the client since the users were not able to.
A possible work around I'm considering is to have the launcher application installed into Program Files as normal, and having the real application that it updates installed in the users documents somewhere, so that they could update and run new versions without IT becoming involved.
I'm wondering what potential gotchas I'm missing here or what I should be aware of before heading down this path. I'm aware that click-once does something very similar, and I'd be using it, except I need the ability to do silent updates, without any user interaction.
This is how it is supposed to be. The last thing most IT departments want is a user randomly updating a piece of software. This could have all sorts of unintentional side effects such as incompatibility with the older version's files, new and possibly insecure functionality, etc. This is why IT departments disable Windows Update and do their updates manually in a controlled fashion.
If the users want an updated version of the software they should be requesting it from their IT department. Those computers and infrastructure don't belong to them, they're simply borrowing time on them from the company they work for so they can do their job.
Is there an issue with having only one installation of your program? Is it particularly large, for example?
Do you require admin privileges to run your program?
If not, odds are you don't need the Program Files folder.
I suggest you forgo installing to Program Files entirely and just install your program into the user's folder system at <userfolder>\AppData\ProgramName.
If you happen to be using .NET, look into the ClickOnce deployment mechanism. It's got a great self-updating feature that'd probably make your life a lot easier.
Edit: Just saw your last sentence. ClickOnce can force the user to update.
A couple of things:
If you decide to move your app to some place in documents, make sure that your application writes data transparently to where your program is installed, e.g. if there are hard coded paths anywhere in the code that are pointing to bad places. Perhaps this is not an issue for you, but might be something to keep in mind.
We solved this in pretty much the same way when we decided to implement a "live update" feature. But instead we installed a service which is running with administrator rights. This service in turn can run installers once the program needs to be updated. With this type of solution you don't even have to move your applicaton out of program files.
Cheers !
Edit:
Another neat thing with having a service running as administrator. Is that you could create a named pipe communication with it and have it do things for you, like you wouldn't be able to do as a normal user.
A loader stub is a good way to go. The only gotcha is when you have to update the loader; the same initial problem applies (though that should be pretty infrequent).
One problem that I can think of off the top of my head is that you're stepping outside the entire idea of keeping things more "secure." Since your executable exists in a location that should be completely accessible to a non-administrator, it's possible that something else could slam your exe thus subverting security.
You can probably leverage AppLocker. It may only be for Win7 though I'm not running Vista any more. ;)