Last modified: 2013-06-23 12:15:09 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T41008, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 39008 - Import old revisions from dump to restore missing revisions
Import old revisions from dump to restore missing revisions
Status: NEW
Product: Wikimedia
Classification: Unclassified
Site requests (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Normal major (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
: shell
Depends on:
Blocks: 37591
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2012-08-03 13:39 UTC by Liangent
Modified: 2013-06-23 12:15 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Liangent 2012-08-03 13:39:54 UTC
Restore revisions lost in bug 37591.
Comment 1 Liangent 2012-08-03 18:10:24 UTC
I made an xml to import (extracted from zhwiki-20120613-pages-meta-history.xml) at http://toolserver.org/~liangent/-/FAC.xml.gz
Comment 2 Liangent 2012-08-03 18:12:07 UTC
Bumping importance as this is a data loss.
Comment 3 Sam Reed (reedy) 2012-08-21 16:21:16 UTC
I don't see why we need 2 bugs for the same issue..
Comment 4 Andre Klapper 2012-11-06 18:39:40 UTC
Wondering who could take a look at this, CC'ing some folks.
Comment 5 Liangent 2012-11-07 05:34:55 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> I don't see why we need 2 bugs for the same issue..

I think we want to find the cause in bug 37591 (but since that doesn't happen so often it doesn't need to have high priority). Once the dump is successfully imported this bug is resolved and in meantime those missing revisions can't be viewed by users so this bug should have higher priority.
Comment 6 Sam Reed (reedy) 2013-05-16 22:45:39 UTC
Is there any reason we can't just use that XML with importDump?
Comment 7 Ariel T. Glenn 2013-05-23 07:50:36 UTC
Ughh... so the page ids are different now than they were at the time of the bug report (I checked this on the production db), the old text entries are indeed still there and are obviously orphaned now.

If we use the XML file, new text entries wil be created.  This isn't awesome, but at least the missing revisions will be back in there.  I have no idea how importDump responds to importing revisions for a page where a page with that title exists already; it will silently skip existing revisions however, and that's good for us.

If we wanted to try to construct the revision rows with the original text ids, there's a stub dump from around the beginning of June 2012 which would give us the info, and a check of the sql query on bug 37591 shows that there was nothing new since then.  Is it worth the work?

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links