Migrating from one association field extension to another
This is an open discussion with 3 replies, filed under Extensions.
Search
@Fish Not quite answering your question but did you see there's migration info for Nils' field over on Github?
https://github.com/hananils/associationuiselector/issues/1
Perhaps this will give you the ideas you need or maybe you can just follow the guide.
@munki Thanks, I hadn't seen that.
It looks like there won't be any surprises, judging from that. I'll have to dive in soon and try it.
Just to note for anyone else doing this, it seems to have worked without issues.
The only difference for converting from referencelink was a couple of differences in the referencelink table. Once field_type
is removed and hide_when_prepopulated
is added, it seems to have transfered smoothly.
Create an account or sign in to comment.
Hi all,
I'm planning to upgrade a site from 2.3.3 to 2.5.2 that uses a lot of reference link fields. Since it uses the core associations, I'm hoping to migrate these to one of the new extensions for associations instead.
I've looked at the database to see how this might work, and would appreciate if anyone could advise me. From what I can see, this would mean moving the contents of
sym_fields_referencelink
to the corresponding table of the new extension (with possibly some column changes), and changing all instances of "referencelink" in the type column ofsym_fields
.Can anyone confirm that this would cover it, or would other changes be required?
Also, a more general question on the DB structure. The use of the
sym_fields_NAME
tables seems quite variable from one extension to another. I notice thatsym-fields_number
in my database is empty, despite there being a few of these. Also,sym_fields_select
seems to still contain previously deleted fields that no longer have a correspondingsym_entries_data_ID
table.I take it these are only really needed when there are special configuration options in the section editor. Is that correct?
Thanks.