-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
Diff db-docs and ps/migrations #594
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. Weโll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: ps/migrations
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -71,7 +71,6 @@ SDLC | |
Serilog | ||
signtool | ||
signup | ||
sprocs | ||
sqlcmd | ||
struct | ||
structs | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -4,11 +4,20 @@ sidebar_position: 2 | |
|
||
# Entity Framework | ||
|
||
:::info | ||
|
||
For instructions on how to apply database migrations, please refer to the | ||
[Getting Started](../../getting-started/server/database/ef/index.mdx) documentation. | ||
|
||
::: | ||
|
||
If you alter the database schema, you must create an EF migration script to ensure that EF databases | ||
keep pace with these changes. Developers must do this and include the migrations with their PR. | ||
|
||
To create these scripts, you must first update your data model in `Core/Entities` as desired. This | ||
will be used to generate the migrations for each of our EF targets. | ||
will be used to generate the migrations for each of our EF targets. Additionally, for table changes | ||
it is strongly recommended to define or update an `IEntityTypeConfiguration<T>` to accurately | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This seems out of place, it's not directly related to migrations but general EF best practices. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Where would it go then? I feel like the prior existing sentence is in the same camp, but both need to be modified for migrations so I put it here. |
||
represent any constraints needed on the data model. | ||
|
||
Once the model is updated, navigate to the `dev` directory in the `server` repo and execute the | ||
`ef_migrate.ps1` PowerShell command. You should provide a name for the migration as the only | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -11,97 +11,72 @@ For instructions on how to apply database migrations, please refer to the | |
|
||
::: | ||
|
||
## SQL database project | ||
:::tip | ||
|
||
We use a [SDK-style SQL project][MSBuildSQL] (`sqlproj`) to develop the database locally. This means | ||
we have an up-to-date representation of the database in `src/Sql`, and any modifications needs to be | ||
represented there as well. SDK-style SQL projects are still in preview the tooling is not yet | ||
available in Visual Studio. However it is available in [Visual Studio Code][vscode] and [Azure Data | ||
Studio][azureds] with the [SQL Database Projects][SDPE] extension, which provides schema comparison | ||
and more. You may also modify the `.sql` files directly with any text editor. | ||
We recommend reading [T-SQL Code Style](../code-style/sql.md) since it has a major impact in how we | ||
write migrations. | ||
|
||
To make a database change, start by modifying the `.sql` files in `src/Sql/dbo`. These changes will | ||
also need to be applied in a migration script. Migration scripts are located in | ||
`util/Migrator/DbScripts`. | ||
::: | ||
|
||
You can either generate the migration scripts automatically using the _Schema Comparison_ | ||
functionality or by manually writing them. Do note that the automatic method will only take you so | ||
far and it will need to be manually edited to adhere to the code styles. | ||
## SQL database project | ||
|
||
For added safe guards we have automated linting and validation to ensure the SQL project is always | ||
up to date with the migrations. | ||
Comment on lines
-16
to
-32
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I prefer my section it explains the SQL project with links to references and how they relate to DbScripts. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Grabbed most of it with some removals due to what exists today. |
||
The separate database definitions in `src/Sql/.../dbo` serve as a "master" reference for the | ||
intended and final state of the database at that time. This is crucial because the state of database | ||
definitions at the current moment may differ from when a migration was added in the past. These | ||
definitions act as a lint and validation step to ensure that migrations work as expected, and the | ||
separation helps maintain clarity and accuracy in database schema management and synchronization | ||
processes. | ||
|
||
## Modifying the database | ||
Additionally, a | ||
[SQL database project](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure-data-studio/extensions/sql-database-project-extension-sdk-style-projects) | ||
is in place; however, instead of using the auto-generated migrations from | ||
[DAC](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/data-tier-applications/data-tier-applications?view=sql-server-ver16), | ||
we manually write migrations. This approach is chosen to enhance performance and prevent accidental | ||
data loss, which is why we have both a `sqlproj` and standalone migrations. | ||
|
||
Since we follow [Evolutionary Database Design _(EDD)_](./edd.mdx), any migration that modifies | ||
existing columns most likely needs to be split into at least two parts: a backwards compatible | ||
transition phase, and a non-backwards compatible phase. | ||
## Modifying the database | ||
|
||
### Best practices | ||
In accordance with the tenets of [Evolutionary Database Design](./edd.mdx) every change must be | ||
considered as split into two parts: | ||
|
||
When writing a migration script there are a couple of best practices we follow. Please check the | ||
[T-SQL Code Style][code-style-sql] for more details. But the most important aspect is ensuring the | ||
script can be re-run on the database multiple times without producing any errors or data loss. | ||
withinfocus marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
1. A backwards-compatible transition migration | ||
2. A non-backwards-compatible final migration | ||
|
||
### Backwards compatible | ||
It is likely that a change does not require a non-backwards-compatible end phase e.g. all changes | ||
may be backwards-compatible in their final form; in that case, only one phase of changes is | ||
Comment on lines
+45
to
+46
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. One issue with our existing DB model is that we've gravitated towards making every field optional. I don't see that as a. best practice and one of the dangers of almost always only using backwards compatible migrations. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Neither do I see it as one. |
||
required. With the use of beta testing, partial roll-outs, [feature flags](../feature-flags.md), | ||
etc. the often-chosen path is to spread a change across several major releases with a calculated | ||
future state that can perform a "cleanup" migration that is backwards-compatible but still | ||
represents an overall-_incompatible_ change beyond the boundaries of what we need for individual | ||
release safety. | ||
|
||
Since we follow _EDD_ the first migration needs to retain backwards compatibility with existing | ||
production code. | ||
### Backwards compatible migration | ||
|
||
1. Modify the source `.sql` files in `src/Sql/dbo`. | ||
2. Write a migration script, and place it in `util/Migrator/DbScripts`. Each script _must_ be | ||
prefixed with the current date. | ||
|
||
Please take care to ensure any existing _Stored Procedure_ accepts the same input parameters which | ||
ensures backwards compatibility. In the case a column is renamed, moved care needs to be taken to | ||
ensure the existing sprocs first checks the new location before falling back to the old location. We | ||
also need to ensure we continue updating the old data columns, since in case a rollback is necessary | ||
no data should be lost. | ||
2. Write a migration script, and place it in `util/Migrator/DbScripts`. Each script must be prefixed | ||
with the current date. | ||
|
||
### Data migration | ||
Please take care to ensure: | ||
|
||
We now need to write a script that migrates any data from the old location to the new locations. | ||
This script should ideally be written in a way that supports batching, i.e. execute for X number of | ||
rows at a time. This helps avoiding locking the database. When running the scripts against the | ||
server please keep running it until it affects `0 rows`. | ||
- any existing stored procedure accepts the same input parameters and that new parameters have | ||
nullable defaults | ||
- when a column is renamed the existing stored procedures first check (coalesce) the new location | ||
before falling back to the old location | ||
- continued updating of the old data columns since in case of a rollback no data should be lost | ||
|
||
### Non-backwards compatible | ||
### Non-backwards compatible migration | ||
|
||
These changes should be written from the perspective of "all data has been migrated". And any old | ||
_Stored Procedures_ that were kept around for backwards compatibility should be removed. Any logic | ||
for syncing old and new data should also be removed in this step. | ||
These changes should be written from the perspective of "all data has been migrated" and any old | ||
stored procedures that were kept around for backwards compatibility should be removed. Any logic for | ||
syncing old and new data should also be removed in this step. | ||
|
||
Since `Sql/dbo` represents the current state we need to introduce a "future" state which we will | ||
call `dbo_finalization`. | ||
|
||
1. Copy the relevant `.sql` files from `src/Sql/dbo` to `src/Sql/dbo_finalization`. | ||
withinfocus marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
2. Remove the backwards compatibility which is no longer needed. | ||
3. Write a new Migration and place it in `src/Migrator/DbScripts_finalization`, name it | ||
1. Remove the backwards compatibility that is no longer needed. | ||
2. Write a new Migration and place it in `src/Migrator/DbScripts_finalization`. Name it | ||
`YYYY-0M-FinalizationMigration.sql`. | ||
- Typically migrations are designed to be run in sequence. However since the migrations in | ||
DbScripts_future can be run out of order, care must be taken to ensure they remain compatible | ||
with the changes to DbScripts. In order to achieve this we only keep a single migration, which | ||
executes all backwards incompatible schema changes. | ||
|
||
### [Not Yet Implemented] Manual MSSQL migrations | ||
|
||
There may be a need for a migration to be run outside of our normal update process. These types of | ||
migrations should be saved for very exceptional purposes. One such reason could be an Index rebuild. | ||
|
||
1. Write a new Migration with a prefixed current date and place it in | ||
`src/Migrator/DbScripts_manual` | ||
2. After it has been run against our Cloud environments and we are satisfied with the outcome, | ||
create a PR to move it to `DbScripts`. This will enable it to be run by our Migrator processes in | ||
self-host and clean installs of both cloud and self-host environments | ||
Comment on lines
-86
to
-95
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Have we determined we will never do this? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd say yes. It's problematic for self-host. Things like this just aren't added to source control if they have no auditable change. A rebuild could be done, but that isn't necessary in the source as it is transient. |
||
|
||
[repository]: | ||
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/architecture/microservices/microservice-ddd-cqrs-patterns/infrastructure-persistence-layer-design | ||
[dapper]: https://github.com/DapperLib/Dapper | ||
[code-style-sql]: ../code-style/index.md#t-sql | ||
[MSBuildSQL]: | ||
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/azure-data-studio/extensions/sql-database-project-extension-sdk-style-projects?view=sql-server-ver16 | ||
[vscode]: https://code.visualstudio.com/ | ||
[azureds]: | ||
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/azure-data-studio/download-azure-data-studio?view=sql-server-ver16 | ||
[SDPE]: | ||
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/azure-data-studio/extensions/sql-database-project-extension?view=sql-server-ver16 | ||
`DbScripts_finalization` can be run out of order, care must be taken to ensure they remain | ||
compatible with the changes to `DbScripts`. In order to achieve this we only keep a single | ||
migration, which executes all backwards incompatible schema changes. | ||
|
||
Upon execution any finalization scripts will be [automatically moved](./edd.mdx#online-environments) | ||
for proper history. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.