[Vtigercrm-developers] 4.2.4 installer creates tables as MyISAM

[Jeff Kowalczyk]

Mike Fedyk wrote:
> Ok, we have a modified adodb in vtiger 4.2.3.

I sympathize for any breakage that might result from my adodb updates, and
have tried to make them single-commit to ease reverts if needed.

My goal has been to find out to where vtigercrm deviates from production
adodb (currently adodb-4.72) and reduce the question of bundling vs
external dependency to a minimum diff needed to run.

> It allows you to specify <opt>Type=InnoDB</opt> in the XML file. And
> updating adodb breaks that.

Is the use of InnoDB storage necessary for mysql operation, or was it just
a performance-seeking choice?

Since being acquired by Oracle, InnoDB's availability for future
open-source mysql versions is in some question. I would view any InnoDB
dependency as a bug. Especially if it were only an incremental performance
motivation.

What does that <opt> information do to postgresql and other backend
compatibility? Since the team was focused only on mysql, the custom <opt>
may be totally in opposition to our cross-database objectives.

> We're either going to have to revert or port the changes. What does 
> everyone think?

I think we're going to find that few distros will consider vtigercrm as
having met their packaging standards if we have a bundled adodb
that can't be removed in favor of a system-packaged version during
packaging.

If we stay on that route, it must be a well-considered decision to take on
the responsibility of shipping a private copy of a database library. Any
adodb security issues that linger unpatched will reflect poorly on
vtigercrm.