我正在做一个web应用程序,我需要为一些主要的更改做一个分支,事情是,这些更改需要更改数据库模式,所以我想把整个数据库放在git下。

我怎么做呢?是否有一个特定的文件夹,我可以保存在git存储库下?我怎么知道是哪个?我如何确定我放入了正确的文件夹?

我需要确定,因为这些更改是不向后兼容的;我可不能搞砸。

在我的例子中,数据库是PostgreSQL

编辑:

有人建议进行备份并将备份文件置于版本控制之下,而不是将数据库置于版本控制之下。说实话,我觉得这真的很难接受。

肯定有更好的办法。

更新:

好吧,没有更好的方法了,但我还是不太相信,所以我要稍微改变一下问题:

我想将整个数据库置于版本控制之下,我可以使用什么数据库引擎来将实际数据库置于版本控制之下,而不是转储?

sqlite是git友好的吗?

因为这只是开发环境,所以我可以选择任何我想要的数据库。

Edit2:

我真正想要的不是跟踪我的开发历史,而是能够从我的“新的根本性变化”分支切换到“当前稳定的分支”,并且能够用当前稳定的分支修复一些错误/问题等。这样,当我切换分支时,数据库就会自动地与我当前所在的分支兼容。 我不太关心实际数据。


当前回答

我在我的个人项目中做的是,我把我的整个数据库存储到dropbox,然后点MAMP, WAMP工作流,从那里使用它。这样,数据库总是最新的,无论我需要做一些开发。但这只是针对开发!现场是使用自己的服务器,当然!:)

其他回答

看一下RedGate SQL源代码控制。

http://www.red-gate.com/products/sql-development/sql-source-control/

这个工具是一个SQL Server Management Studio管理单元,它允许你用Git把你的数据库放在源代码控制下。

每个用户495美元的价格有点贵,但有28天的免费试用。

请注意 我和“红门”没有任何关系。

我开始想一个非常简单的解决方案,不知道为什么我以前没有想到!!

复制数据库(包括模式和数据)。 在new-major-changes的分支中,只需更改项目配置以使用新的重复数据库。

这样我就可以切换分支,而不用担心数据库模式更改。

编辑:

复制,我的意思是用不同的名称创建另一个数据库(如my_db_2);不是去倾倒之类的东西。

Irmin (branching + time travel) Flur.ee (immutable + time travel + graph query) XTDB (formerly called 'CruxDB') (time travel + query) TerminusDB (immutable + branching + time travel + Graph Query!) DoltDB (branching + time-travel + SQL query) Quadrable (branching + remote state verification) EdgeDB (no real time travel, but migrations derived by the compiler after schema changes) Migra (diffing for Postgres schemas/data. Auto-generate migration scripts, auto-sync db state) ImmuDB (immutable + time-travel)

我们曾经在一个标准的LAMP配置上运行一个社交网站。我们有一个活动服务器、测试服务器和开发服务器,以及本地开发人员机器。所有这些都使用GIT进行管理。

On each machine, we had the PHP files, but also the MySQL service, and a folder with Images that users would upload. The Live server grew to have some 100K (!) recurrent users, the dump was about 2GB (!), the Image folder was some 50GB (!). By the time that I left, our server was reaching the limit of its CPU, Ram, and most of all, the concurrent net connection limits (We even compiled our own version of network card driver to max out the server 'lol'). We could not (nor should you assume with your website) put 2GB of data and 50GB of images in GIT.

To manage all this under GIT easily, we would ignore the binary folders (the folders containing the Images) by inserting these folder paths into .gitignore. We also had a folder called SQL outside the Apache documentroot path. In that SQL folder, we would put our SQL files from the developers in incremental numberings (001.florianm.sql, 001.johns.sql, 002.florianm.sql, etc). These SQL files were managed by GIT as well. The first sql file would indeed contain a large set of DB schema. We don't add user-data in GIT (eg the records of the users table, or the comments table), but data like configs or topology or other site specific data, was maintained in the sql files (and hence by GIT). Mostly its the developers (who know the code best) that determine what and what is not maintained by GIT with regards to SQL schema and data.

When it got to a release, the administrator logs in onto the dev server, merges the live branch with all developers and needed branches on the dev machine to an update branch, and pushed it to the test server. On the test server, he checks if the updating process for the Live server is still valid, and in quick succession, points all traffic in Apache to a placeholder site, creates a DB dump, points the working directory from 'live' to 'update', executes all new sql files into mysql, and repoints the traffic back to the correct site. When all stakeholders agreed after reviewing the test server, the Administrator did the same thing from Test server to Live server. Afterwards, he merges the live branch on the production server, to the master branch accross all servers, and rebased all live branches. The developers were responsible themselves to rebase their branches, but they generally know what they are doing.

如果测试服务器上有问题,例如。合并有太多冲突,然后代码被恢复(将工作分支指向'live'), SQL文件永远不会执行。在执行sql文件时,这被认为是一个不可逆的操作。如果SQL文件不能正常工作,则使用Dump恢复DB(开发人员被告知,因为提供了测试不佳的SQL文件)。

今天,我们同时维护一个sql-up和sql-down文件夹,它们具有相同的文件名,开发人员必须测试这两个正在升级的sql文件是否可以同样降级。这最终可以用bash脚本来执行,但是如果有人一直监视升级过程,这是个好主意。

虽然不是很好,但还是可以控制的。希望这能让你深入了解一个真实的、实用的、相对高可用性的站点。也许它有点过时,但仍然被遵循。

有一个伟大的项目叫做“教义下的移民”,就是为了这个目的而建立的。

它仍然处于alpha状态,是为php构建的。

http://docs.doctrine-project.org/projects/doctrine-migrations/en/latest/index.html