similar to: Migrations, development, test, etc.

Is there a way to pass the database name in config/database.yml to a migration task such that the appropriate (test, development or production) DB is created by the initial migration? What I would like to do is to get this sort of thing to work: class RbacDataStructures < ActiveRecord::Migration def self.up create_database <<dbname from database.yml>> class

I recently started using migrations to create the schema of a Rails project I am working on. The database I am using for this project is MySQL. The initial migration creates the table and also includes a number of execute statements (to do some things like setting primary keys, autoincrement on some columns and other messy voodoo). Running "rake migrate" creates the database with no

I started working on an app. It''s new at this point so backing up wouldn''t be difficult, however I''m wondering if there is some plugin that exists where I can use it to grab the current database (set up without migrations) and create a migration file ? Sort of grab a current snapshot of the database and use that as a stating point for my migrations directory. TIA Stuart

We are currently doing some development on a variety of branches that each have their own set of migrations (gee, database changes on a branch? how novel). The problem is with this strictly linear numbering of the migrations and these alternate branches. Let''s suppose I have branches/foo that adds two migrations 024_add_foo.rb and 025_refine_foo.rb and then another branches/bar

Is there some standard way to test migrations? It seems to me that an additional safeguard for migrations would be to test and see if applying the migrations to the test database allows one to reconstruct the structure of the development database. If you can''t, then there is an error in your migrations, most likely because someone hand-modified the database without generating a

Bad rails day for Matt- In a migration, for a habtm: create_table :teams_users do |t| t.column :team_id, :integer t.column :user_id, :integer end Ok, fine. In a controller (well really a migration script): @user.teams << Team.find( 3 ) And the SQL pumped at my server is: INSERT INTO teams_users (`team_id`, `id`, `user_id`) VALUES (3, 3, 34) Which

Hi I''m struggling to find a neat way to spec this. The Sequel ORM doesn''t support automatically destroying dependent models. It''s easy enough to do in a callback though: class Changeset < Sequel::Model has_many :migrations, :class => DataModel::Migration before_destroy do migrations.each { |m| m.destroy } end # ... end

Hi all, I submitted a patch the other day for an issue I ran into running an "add_column" migration on a sqlite3 database when there is existing data in the table, and the new column has ":null=>false". Details at http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/5215. The issue I encountered was not picked due to the unit test not having any actual data in it before running the

I have spent sometime this afternoon learning how to unit test rails applications and integrate the Cerberus CI tool. One key area confuses me however, and I would appreciate other peoples views of how best to overcome the issue. My understanding is that the ''test'' and ''test:units'' have the db:test:prepare pre-requisite which copies the schema from dev to the

I am developing against an existing database schema that I am enhancing with some custom tables. In the development and test database, I have basically generated "copies" of the legacy tables that already exist in production. So I have 12 migration files, some of which create dev/test versions of production tables and some of which create tables that will need to be moved to

Hi, i am new to rails and trying to understand the migrate feature of rake whenever I call "rake migrate", i understand it call all the latest version of a given of given migrate files. Now when these files are executed, id the #down method called and then the #up ? or must i explicitly call the #down method from rake. If yes how do i do that from rake ? I experimented with rake

As many of you know, rake db:reset changed behavior just before Rails 2.0 got released. db:reset used to drop the database, re create it and migrate it up. The core team after integrating this feature, realized that it was not used as intended and instead db:create now uses the schema.rb file instead of the migrations. Check the many discussions we had about this topic, you will quickly notice

Hi, I was just wondering, is there a "correct" or "preferred" way of setting up the path and other environment variables for Qt 4 development/build using qmake and all - on a CentOS 6 system? I mean, this does not work out-of-the box, at least if you have build files that assume "qmake" may be executed just like that - as there is no Qt 4 qmake on the path,

I have a semi-grand plan for some changes to migrations. Mostly this is motivated by the upcoming 3.0 release and wanting to get migrations in engines working. 1. Don''t skip migrations with version numbers lower than "current". I only recently tripped over this, but apparently it''s been this way since 2.1 when we got timestamps masquerading as large/sparse

Hi, I''m trying to get my head around using migrations to define my initial schema. When using migrations, I want to: - Avoid creating a new migration for every small change. Limit it to one migration per checkin. - When creating a new (fresh) schema, I do not want to go through the overhead of all the migrations. These are the steps I came up with, to create the initial schema: 1.

of course, now that I am relying upon migrations, I''m at a loss to explain why it isn''t working. I have a system which has production and development and I have a development system at home where I created all the new code and migrations. I committed my changes via svn and used ''svn update'' to update the live system. I started by running the migration on the

To reverse a migration that sets a default value, do you set the default to nil? And, if you''re setting a couple of default values just to make early development easier, is it best to do that directly to the database and not clutter your migrations with them? (I.e., it''s not a *real* db change.) Thanks, -- Austin Govella Thinking & Making: IA, UX, and IxD

Hey all, I''ve run into an interesting scenario that I think some of you might have some suggestions on. I am currently working on a RoR project and we are making full use of the migrations. We are also using a subversion repository for our source control. Now, the problem.... We are both making migrations and checking them into SVN. So, if in our checkout we have migrations up to 10 and

I need to put some data into the database using migrations. The data needs to be in UTF-8 format (since the database and the rest of the Rails application is UTF-8). It doesn''t work. I have set up the UTF-8 support in environment.rb (which works perfectly in the rest of the application). I have also tested to save the migration file as a UTF-8 file (variable char length), as a

Rails 3.1 RC4 has broken migrations $ jruby -v jruby 1.6.2 (ruby-1.8.7-p330) (2011-05-23 e2ea975) (Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 1.6.0_24) [darwin-x86_64-java] $ jruby -S rails -v Rails 3.1.0.rc4 $ jruby -S rails new myapp -d jdbcpostgresql [...] $jruby -S rake db:create [...] $ jruby -S rails g model user name:string invoke active_record create