-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11.1k
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. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[11.x] Enhance database migrations #51373
[11.x] Enhance database migrations #51373
Conversation
Thanks for submitting a PR! Note that draft PR's are not reviewed. If you would like a review, please mark your pull request as ready for review in the GitHub user interface. Pull requests that are abandoned in draft may be closed due to inactivity. |
Is there a reason, you mixed the SQLite and migration execution order changes into one PR instead of two separate ones? |
I'm eager to see this merged! |
@shaedrich we can't add SQLite features without fixing the migration commands' orders. |
@hafezdivandari You could have created the SQLite PR as draft, added a comment concerning the PR merging order and have backmerged the |
@shaedrich It's fine ;) |
To be honest this just is too much for us to take on reviewing and maintaining at the moment and I'm not sure the return on investment is there for end users. Feels like something maybe better reserved for later this year or early next year for Laravel 12. |
@taylorotwell How are you guys dropping columns with foreign key in SQLite currently? I do not understand how this is not a major issue for a lot a Laravel applications. |
Hi @hafezdivandari. I think we should still give a part of your PR a chance but like Taylor said and like we said on the Passport PR keep in mind to keep PR's small and separate because reviewing and testing such a large PR as this is simply too much for us at this time. Sending in incremental PR's with the different topics from this PR will be much much more easier to review. I feel like the most important part of this bit is the dropping of foreign keys in SQLite. Could we maybe just focus on that one for now so we can get that back into Laravel v11? Besides that I went through your code changes and while I feel most of this looks okay I do have a question why you decided to move column modifications to different |
Hi @driesvints,
First of all, sorry for sending large PRs 😅 but this one is a little different from the PR on the Passport, separating this into more PRs (if technically possible) doesn't make it easier to review. Because although this PR fixes 2 main problems at the same time, it doesn't mean the changes can necessarily be sent on 2 separate PRs. But I can add comments on each part of the code changes and explain in more details if you want. IMHO that would be really helpful when reviewing.
As I tried to explain on this comment earlier and this one, It is not possible to fix the drop foreign on SQLite (or any other commands that needs recreating the table on SQLite) without fixing the "order of commands" problem first.
Because preserving the order of commands matters. Please read the "Preserve the order of commands" section above. The rule is simple, compile commands one by one, instead of packing them together and losing the order. |
We're gonna have another look at this but it could be a few weeks before we get to it. Thanks! |
FWIW I’m running into the issue of not being able to drop foreign keys in SQLite and would very much appreciate having this fix in. It’s making a mess of things on my end. |
Not working with Laravel 11: - laravel/framework#51318 - laravel/framework#51373
https://github.com/orchestral/testbench-core/actions/runs/9866136206 |
@crynobone the error is on this line, it seems that connection's |
@crynobone I may have found the cause of issue: The It seems that schema builder doesn't reconnect the connection! |
Noted. Probably something Testbench specific. I will investigate further. Thanks @hafezdivandari |
Adding a note here that this merge change appears to have affected some tests in my laravel-model-uuid package - specifically where we're making assertions against the shape of the resulting alter statements. As I'm specifically testing that the generated queries are correctly formatted, I don't necessarily think this is a breaking change to end users as the resulting query is ultimately the same, just that now there are multiple queries rather than a single one. Not sure this has tangible impact to framework consumers, though. |
The queries themselves were not changed, however, the statements are now generated as separate array items, rather than as a single query. Pinned minimum framework version to `^11.15` and lifted package to PHP `^8.2`, seeing as we need these as minimums to satisfy these changes here.
The queries themselves were not changed, however, the statements are now generated as separate array items, rather than as a single query. Pinned minimum framework version to `^11.15` and lifted package to PHP `^8.2`, seeing as we need these as minimums to satisfy these changes here.
Thanks @michaeldyrynda, these changes were expected, as I explained on this comment before merge and the changes on framework's tests also show that. Nice package by the way. You may also want to check PR #50355 for use in your code. |
Looks like I'm a bit late to the party, though ...
– Yep just happened. Logically, @hafezdivandari is right to have the migration commands in consecutive order like they depend on each other, which helps reducing confusion. However, imagine the following case:
Because we figured out that migrations were not running in the right order, we used this schema for rename/adding in a single step. Even though I agree that it is supposed to be a bug, doesn't mean people are not depending on it's behaviour. Luckily, this doesn't affect our production systems because the past migrations don't have to run again. Instead, it rather pulled the plug on our integration pipeline because all out of a sudden, all tests were failing. Fortunately, these are only a few affected migrations and quickly fixed. However, finding the root cause took quite some time, because this change wasn't appropriately documented (due to the size of the PR?) and it's breaking character wasn't obvious at first. Just as a short heads-up that even bug fixes can introduce breaking changes and to confirm @taylorotwell's feeling ;-) |
@j-mastr off course Taylor's feeling is right. It was a hard decision to make and the PR was open for 2 months. Besides that, it was much easier for me to send this to 12.x instead. Since the patch release on Tuesday, I'm checking the issue board every hour and try to find related discussions on other packages too! About your example, you are adding a column
The PR description couldn't be more long I think, tried to cover every aspect + other comments on this thread. But I believe this maybe could be covered better on weekly Laravel newsletters after release to better inform the community. Thanks for the feedback and sorry for the trouble, everyone. |
I think this might be a breaking change. Disclaimer: the feature set is nice, so I'm not complaining, just thought to share the information. One of our migrations started to fail on SQLite, beginning with Laravel 11.15: Having Laravel 11.15 it fails: Switching back to Laravel 11.14 solves the problem: The linked example is from a library that supports Laravel 10.43+ and Laravel 11.0+ I believe we can find a workaround, like checking what Laravel version we have, and acting accordingly. But maybe you have a better suggestion. |
@fulopattila122 you are trying to drop a column with foreign key on SQLite, that causes error, you may either don't add foreign key on sqlite or drop the foreign before dropping the column: Solution 1: if ('sqlite' !== DB::getDriverName()) {
$table->foreign('root_item_id')->references('id')->on('link_group_items');
} Solution 2: $table->dropForeign(['root_item_id']); |
Ohh, this is a large one... Breaking the tests for us. |
@ekandreas would you please share more info? Code? Exception? |
Sorry, some kind of integrity violation in our seeder that caused an error.
|
This PR does a lot of improvements and unlocks many possibilities on database migrations, also makes it easier to maintain!
New Features / Enhancements 🚀
Extend SQLite support to 3.26+
Laravel currently requires SQLite 3.35+, this PR extends SQLite support to 3.26+
Add and Drop Foreign Keys on SQLite
Fixes #25475, #23461. SQLite doesn't support adding / dropping foreign keys with
alter table
command, but as suggested on the docs, you may recreate the table with arbitrary changes, that's what this PR do to implement these commands.This PR adds support for blueprint's
$table->foreign()
,$table->dropForeign()
methods and->constrained()
modifier on SQLite:Fixes #51318, SQLite doesn't allow dropping a column if it is used in a foreign key constraint, this PR makes it possible:
Add and Drop the primary key on SQLite
This PR adds support for blueprint's
$table->primary()
,$table->dropPrimary()
methods,->primary()
, and->primary(false)->change()
modifiers when modifying table on SQLite:Preserve the order of commands
This is the most important change on this PR; When updating table and compiling blueprint commands to SQL, the order of commands wasn't respected:
As discussed on #50925, this will causes issue, unexpected results and leads to error most of the time when updating table. For example, the following code raises
The 'username' column already exists!
SQL error on all databases, becauseadd column
command was compiled beforerename column
:This PR fixes this by preserving the order of commands as declared on the blueprint. You don't have to call each command in a separate
Schema::table
anymore that breaks migration transaction!Blueprint State for SQLite
As explained before, when updating table on SQLite, we have to recreate the table to do arbitrary changes. To do so we need to know the current state of the table on each command. This PR adds
BlueprintState
class to keep track of changes on the table. After this PR we are able to mix any combination of blueprint commands in a singleSchema::table
(as demonstrated on the added integration tests) and it works as expected in the same order!Notes
Unlike other database drivers, foreign keys don't have name on SQLite, so obviously you can't drop a foreign key by its name on SQLite:
We probably need to remove
withSqlite
trait onorchestral/testbench
package, it seems we don't need that anymore if it's merged?