I know I'm late to the dance here, but bein' as I'm confronting the same problem mentioned in the following threads...
- http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=158870 (ostensibly resolved in http://tracker.moodle.org/browse/MDL-24490)
...i'm looking for a firm and consistent answer.
In my thinking, problems with incompatible data lengths and database fields in upgrade routines are bugs. I must say I was appalled that my upgrade was unceremoniously dumped when existing data in a 1.9+ working installation failed to make the trip through the routine. Folks need to correct me if I'm wrong, but if the data is currently being stored in the database in a working 1.9 install, there's only two ways it'd crash an upgrade:
- The database is changed (capacity reduced) through the upgrade, or
- The routine itself is unable to gracefullly anticipate and handle data length conflicts.
Am I off base here? I'm really not a coder, but, at the very least, might the upgrade routine be adjusted to allow the upgrade to continue (and just repeat the error as text output, like it does with missing physical files) rather than allowing it to crash? It seems like the most consistently used fix in the threads above is "modify the data type to accomodate the long text the upgrade wants." I'm always reluctant to make such changes. Am I too paranoid?
Should there be an entry in the Tracker system for this problem?
I'm going from 1.9.16 directly to the current 2.2.3. I'm working on a beta site with pretty large cloned production data -- just trying to come up with a procedure for the "real" production upgrade in early June. Thanks in advance.