[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

# Re: Database editors

- Date: Wed, 13 Sep 1995 12:20:45 PDT
- From:
- cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
- Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
- In-Reply-To: <m0ssduz-0001AzC@golden.ripco.com>

    On Tue, 12 Sep 1995, ThwartedEfforts wrote:

    > >May I add changing a player's password,
    >
    > yuck.

    Why is this a bad thing?  If I got $0.10 for every time I heard about
    another lone wizard on another MOO who forgot his or her password and
    need to put in a new one, I'd be a rich man.  Okay, maybe not rich... but
    I'd have enough to buy a Whopper or something.

    > >setting a player flag (for those
    > >really stupid ones who @toad #2 without backing up first), etc.  One time I
    > >accidently @recycled #0 on my personal play pen MOO. (Believe me it was an
    > >accident... I made a typo in an eval or something.  Honest.)
    >
    > Anyone who does this more than once (and if you do do it, then you should be
    >  restoring from a backup, not trying to edit the db) probally isn't learning
    >  that these things are "bad".  If you are working on something big or if
    >  you are accident prone, you should be making backups often.

    I just added that in because yes, I did hear one or two instances where
    #2's player flag was removed.  Sure, it's a stupid thing.  Just that it
    has happened, so an editor, maybe, ought to handle it.  That's the only
    use really for a database editor: doing things that can't be done with
    LambdaMOO or fixing a broken database that can't be loaded or brought
    under control.

    > >So, might I also add porting an object between databases?
    >
    > While I will admit that @dump is not the best, it does work, and is, at this
    >  time, the best thing we have for porting objects.

    Okay, so maybe this isn't the best idea for a database editor.  I just
    came up with it and tossed it in to see what people thought.  I agree, it
    would be better if someone created a porting object to handle porting
    between MOOs... maybe one logs into the second via $network and sends the
    object?

    > As far as everyone knows (no known reported cases) the LambdaMOO server doesn't
    >  corrupt databases during normal operation (I've never even seen a db become
    >  corrupt during abnormal operation), so there is no reason you shouldn't be
    >  using the server to change the contents of a database, and even for operator
    >  error, a backup of the db is a much better option than hand editing it.

    True.  but it does, occationally, become corrupt for whatever reason.
    And, every single time, it was on a MOO that backs up only once every day
    because of limited RAM or a slow CPU, or maybe even less often, and it
    always occours right after the tired wizard has just finished an
    extremely huge and groundbreaking day long project.  I think that having
    a (very simple) database editor would be an advantage, just to handle
    common causes of corruption.  Maybe search through the database and look
    for corrupt things and report where they're at so if you're a decent db
    editor, you can fix it?

    Phantom

Follow-Ups:

- MOO Gate System (was Re: Database Editors)

- From: "Nate Massey" <natem@ctdnet.acns.nwu.edu>

References:

- Re: Database editors

- From: abakun@rci.ripco.com (ThwartedEfforts)

- Prev: Re: Database Editors
- Next: Re: Database editors
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index