Drop support for MySQL #115
Conversation
According to Chris Matthews, this had been added exclusively for the (now defunct) lnt.llvm.org instance, which was running on Google's internal infrastructure and hence had constraints on the database software it could use. Since that is not relevant anymore, simplify the codebase and the support matrix of LNT by dropping support for MySQL. According to Chris, LNT was originally always intended to run on a Postgres database. This allows us to actually test what we claim to support, making LNT more robust despite its slightly shrunken support matrix. In practice, I expect that nobody will be impacted by this change since nobody is running a MySQL instance.
|
@antmox what about Linaro's instance(s)? |
we're still using mysql. we should move to postgres anyway |
Aw, what a bummer. I didn't know Linaro was running an instance -- I'm currently building context on this. @antmox Do you think this is something that can be done in the short/mid term? It's not critically needed, but it would definitely be nice to straighten up our support matrix. |
|
@ldionne Yes, switching to postgres doesn't seem too complicated. |
|
@antmox That's nice, thanks! I'll still wait a bit before I merge this, in case you run into something unexpected. |
3 participants
According to Chris Matthews, this had been added exclusively for the (now defunct) lnt.llvm.org instance, which was running on Google's internal infrastructure and hence had constraints on the database software it could use.
Since that is not relevant anymore, simplify the codebase and the support matrix of LNT by dropping support for MySQL. According to Chris, LNT was originally always intended to run on a Postgres database.
This allows us to actually test what we claim to support, making LNT more robust despite its slightly shrunken support matrix. In practice, I expect that nobody will be impacted by this change since nobody is running a MySQL instance.