topic Re: upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17. Possible? in Alfresco Archive

upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17. Possible?

shikarishambu — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 20:42:07 GMT

I am trying to upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17 with SQL Server database and I am running into some issues. 5.17 upgrade complains that ACT_HI_VARINST and ACT_HI_IDENTITYLINK are missing. Some of the fields (e.g image datatype) remain as is (image datatype is now changed to varbinary).Is upgrading from 5.9

Re: upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17. Possible?

martin_grofcik — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 06:32:11 GMT

Hi,

Did you run upgrade scripts or were their applied automatically?
Do you have missing tables in the DB?

Regards
Martin

Re: upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17. Possible?

shikarishambu — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:00:24 GMT

I am letting Activiti apply it automatically. Yes, I have two db tables missing, too. 5.9 has about 20 tables and 5.17 has 24 tables. when I switch from 5.9 activity-explorer to 5.17 activity-explorer on the same DB I end up with 22 tables. Should I be doing upgrade in a different way?

Thanks

Re: upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17. Possible?

trademak — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 19:03:11 GMT

Hi,

Which database and version are you using? All upgrade scripts are there so yes an upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17 should be possible. ACT_HI_VARINST for example is created in the upgrade script from 5.10 to 5.11.

Best regards,

Re: upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17. Possible?

shikarishambu — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 23:06:21 GMT

I am using SQL Server 2008 R2. I think I am missing ACT_HI_IDENTITYLINK and ACT_HI_VARINST remain missing in my case. ACT_EVT_LOG and ACT_RE_MODEL gets created.

I think it would be best if the upgrade scripts had IF EXISTS/ IF NOT EXISTS check (though that is probably not why these tables are not getting created). I also end up missing some columns in tables that have been modified - e.g. the TENANT_ID_ column. And, all text/ image datatypes remain as such while these have been upgraded to varchar(max) and varbinary(max), respectively.

Re: upgrade from 5.9 to 5.17. Possible?

jbarrez — Tue, 07 Jul 2015 11:49:41 GMT

That's very odd, we have specifically upgrade unit tests to test this (certainly the tenant id column): http://ec2-54-217-5-246.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com:8080/jenkins/job/ActivitiUpgrade/

Would be interesting to see which things are all missing and if they are part of the upgrade script.