Can I simply change the connection string to point from my Test DB to my Production DB when I go live with my website and DAL generated via Subsonic?
When I try to push to my production servers the DAL still seems to be talking with my Test DB even though I have changed the connectionstring to a valid production DB that contains the identical Schema.
TIA
John
Yes, you should only have to change the setting in your web.config and make sure that your web app reloads. (it should almost always reload when the web.config is changed or replaced but I have seen times when it won't, you can then restart it in IIS or try editing the web.config locally)
You shouldn't have to rebuild
Change the connection string, rebuild, and xcopy.
Related
I am using wildfly-8.2.0.Final.
There are several databases that i have to connect to. However, some of them are only used for certain functionalities on the web application and they are not needed to be online all the time. So when the wildfly starts, some of the datasources may not be online. However, disconnection to any datasource causes wildfly to not deploy .war deployment and i cannot find any way to solve this problem. Is there a way?
UPDATE:
I have a single table on a remote database server. The user will be able to query the table via my web application. The thing is, I have almost no control over the mentioned database. When the web application starts, it could be offline. However, this would cause my web application to fail to start. What I want is being able to run queries on a remote database if it is online. If it is offline, the web page could fail or the query can be canceled. But the only thing that I don’t want is that my web application to be limited by a remote database that I may have no control over.
My previous solution was a workaround. I would run queries on the remote database via a local database which has a foreign table to the remote one. However, the local one reads all data on the remote table before applying any constraints on postgresql 9.5. As the remote table has a large number of rows and I am using lazy loading, it takes so long for a single query and defeats the whole purpose of the lazy loading.
I found a similar question, but there is no answer.
On wildfly, you can set the datasource so that it tries to reconnect periodically when it disconnects. In my case, the deployment should be successful initially for this to be helpful.
The deployment will failed if it references those datasources.
Also you could define but disable those datasources.
Is it possible for Sails.js app to understand config file changes without having to restart server ? I want to add routes and change Mail server config params without server reboot. sails-hook-autoreload, seems to only cover models, controllers and services.
What are my options? I really do not want to restart the server when there are so many users logged into the app.
Please help. Thanks for reading the post
It isn't possible because the configs are only loaded into the app during start up. Your best bet to do scheduled maintenance and bring the app down and restart do your testing and then reopen the app to users.
I am not sure how to use it but I hear containers like Docker may be another solution where you containerize your app and use it to push updates out. Haven't used it but that could be a solution.
I am using Entity Framework Code First to create my database.
Here is the current connection string
"Integrated Security=SSPI;MultipleActiveResultSets=True;Pooling=false;Data Source=(localdb)\\v11.0;Initial Catalog=Inventory"
However this database is not visible when I try to attach it inside SQL Server Management Studio.
This is because the account that runs the SQL Server service would need to have access to my user folder in order to see it.
I tried giving this account access but had problems due to permissions of other things in my user folder.
Thus I thought I should perhaps specify a folder name for the database to be created in, but I am unsure on how to do this, and what other problems this approach may bring.
[Update]
I am now investigating setting the AttachDbFilename in app.config
this link is helpful however I aren't clear on how to set up |DataDirectory| for a winforms app.
[Update]
The following connection string works
<add name="ConnectionString" connectionString="Integrated Security=SSPI;MultipleActiveResultSets=True;Pooling=false;Data Source=(localdb)\v11.0;AttachDbFilename=c:\databases\MyDatabase.mdf;"/>
It would be helpful to know how to configure the path to be the same as the exe file location.
You may first use sql server management studio (ssms) to connect to your localdb instance (server name: (localdb)\v11.0, Windows authentication)
make a backup of your localdb database (right click db -> task -> backup)
then share the db backup file with other system.
I wound up placing the following in Main()
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData("DataDirectory", AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory);
and the following in app.config
<add name="ConnectionString" connectionString="Integrated Security=SSPI;MultipleActiveResultSets=True;Pooling=false;Data Source=(localdb)\v11.0;AttachDbFilename=|DataDirectory|\MyDatabase.mdf;"/>
I've deployed in Windows Azure a website made with Umbraco, using
Windows Azure Accelerator for Umbraco.
For development and test i used a test Hostname. Now it's time to switch to the official DNS hostname..
How can I change current hostname?
Actually i configured hostname at deployment time (the only way i know to do this) but i can't deploy again, since many files have been changed working on website on Azure.
EDIT
Let me explain: at the step prompt in the image (during web site deploying) I used as Domain Name "test.mywebsite.com", and configured real DNS.
Now the website is configured, so I'd like to make mywebsite.com point to that site;
But is'nt enough if i configure mywebsite DNS! Shall I deploy again? An will I lose any of the changes I made?
I'd like to make two comments on your question:
1) In order to host your Azure application under a custom host name, you will need to sign up with a DNS provider that supports C-NAME records (most do). I suggest someone like GoDaddy.com because by default C-NAME records can only resolve your "www.domainname.com" records and cannot do anything for queries where "www." is dropped from the URL. DNS providers like GoDaddy also have an option to redirect all traffic destined for "domainname.com" to a URL of your choice. This is a huge deal for Azure apps. Frankly speaking, it is somewhat disappointing that for all the PaaS and IaaS features of Azure, DNS was not included in the overall package.
2) I am a little worried when you say that you can no longer redeploy your app due to the changes made. Can you elaborate on that? Have you made changes to the application's code running on VM's in Azure without going through redeployment process? If so, this is a huge no-no. Your VM's running in Azure are not "permanent". Microsoft and your redeployment process can (and will) re-stage those VM's to the original package at any given time. Microsoft will re-image your VM's at least once a month during their monthly OS upgrades. But they can also do so when they need to move your VM to another rack, etc. Whatever changes that you make to your app must be either stored in source-control before deployment or in a permanent storage facility like SQL Azure, Azure Storage, etc.
HTH
Finally i think that the answers to my questions are:
-Shall I deploy again? Yes, i must deploy again
-Will I lose any of the changes I made? Many changes will be mantained since are stored into DB. But I have to do many activities to make new website work!
This answer confirms my theory:
In my case, I created and uploaded a site with a name, let's say
http://www.contoso.com and then paid a domain from a registrar let's say
http://www.example.com, when I mapped
http://MyAcceleratorsService.cloudapp.net/ to my new domain
( http://www.example.com ) and tried to open that domain I got the home page of
the Accelerator and not the uploaded site.
I had to upload the site again to Azure (using UploadUmbracoSite.cmd
from Accelerator application) and when uploading enter the same domain
name as the one I registered: http://www.example.com. Then, I was able to
browse my uploaded site as expected.
As for your question, will upload site again using
UploadUmbracoSite.cmd (is in the Setup folder) and will enter the new
domain name when requested.
Exactly what I was trying to avoid.. but the only solution, i suppose.
Well it was not easy to publish again, i got errors of many type (i suppose tied to some components that i've installed after deploy and that are not installed in new deployed website).. i'm going to solve them.
Edit
Completed my work:
- loads of different attempts, no-one worked
- CTP backup of DB
- deleted DB and website
- new full deploy of umbraco
- CTP restore of DB
finally:
-all work on content is OK
-all work on styles, pages, templates is lost
Changing hostname is hard; dont'use test hostname but definitive hostname from the beginning.
If anyone has suggest, i'll be pleased to test it, anyway
This is not really an answer to your question, but it might be a solution to your problem: Use a CNAME record to make the production DNS name point to your development name. E.g. www.productionname.com will the point to www.testname.com. I am not sure if everything will just work out of the box, but it seems to be worth a try.
This requires, that your hosting provider allows you to set up CNAME records.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNAME_record
I'm in the process of developing a deployment system for a new web app and I'm wondering where the best point in the process to manage database migrations is (the question of how to do the migrations is another problem entirely).
It seems there are two ways to go:
Use a migration script that can
either be run manually from command
line or as part of the automatic
deployment/build process
Run the migrations when the app
starts up (I'm using ASP.NET so this
can be done easily enough without
causing a long-running user request)
Does anyone have any suggestions/insight/experience with these approaches? Any other suggestions?
I can see why #1 might be more attractive - it gives me complete control over when the DB is updated. However, I quite like #2 as it allows me to quickly iterate between deployments and reduces the manual process. #2 could also be used on my development machine to allow even quicker iterations. Hmm, starting to think having both might be a good thing...
We have a sales-force system with ~100 client and we are updating database at application startup (True, our is a desktop application.) I like this approach, it's safe and iterative if we have indeterministic startpoint (is the client database new or only updated to verison x.y.z?).
But at serverside I'm preferr your #1 option: we create a SQL query file on our virtual machine (based on the copy of the original database) and runs this query against the real server.
So IMHO:
Disconnected clients: startup, iterative scripts
Server: query created on VM based on the actual and real database
So I'm interrested in this problem too, and find some (half)frameworks as RikMigrations. After some googling there is a good startplace about DB versioning/migration frameworks: .NET Database Migration Tool Roundup. Not neccessarely the documentation but the team blogs can be interresting.
I like option #1 better as it seems much more flexible. In lieu of actually performing migrations on each app start, I think I would verify that the database schema (version number?) matches the code, and if not, throw a warning or error about a mismatched database schema.
I'd prefer option #1 for a number of reasons. First, integration tests usually require your DB schema to be up-to-date, and launching a web-site to upgrade the schema will be a huge timewaster. Second, you cannot change database schema while your site is running (say, add a couple of indexes to speed things up).
As for production side of things, upgrading your database in transaction MSI-style installation is much better than attempting to upgrade at each app startup since you can potentially end up with desynchronized database-application versions.
And if you're looking for the migration framework, take a look at Wizardby.
If the application ever has to run on a customer's machine than migrating at startup can prevent a lot of support calls - assuming you can do seamless migration without user intervention (I hope you aren't normally running your web app with permission to modify the database).
If the application always runs under your control automatic migration is less of an issue - but still can be a good feature, especially if you want to minimize downtime and manual deployment steps.