How about the following, not optimal, proposal:

* get back to one data-source
* stick w/ Keycloak-1.1.0-final (in case updating to KC-1.2.0 makes above item harder)

I understand that a separation of the two is needed on the longer run - it would be good if that's something on our agenda post 1.1.0 e.g. for 1.2.0 

I think the above is a 'work around', which I could live with and buys us time to truly think about a perfect separation.






On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:


On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Douglas Campos <qmx@qmx.me> wrote:
Howdy y'all!

I'm revisiting migration strategies for UPS master, and we have a tough situation to deal with.

Since we have moved keycloak to its own DataSource, there are KC leftovers at UPS database which need to be cleaned up.

1) Any suggestions on how to provide a migration path?
  Since the tables are intertwined with UPS tables, it's not a matter of doing a db dump/restore... 

how are they intertwined? Is UPS stuff stored in KC tables, or vice versa?
 
2) How to ensure we can safely get rid of the leftover tables on UPS DataSource?
  I can easily provide migrations which just nuke the tables from the face of the earth,

that's good, but
 
but how to do this without data loss?

I don't know :-) I wonder if we just can not move the data to a new datasource.



 

Thoughts?

_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev



--



--
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf