I inherited the job of administering a Raven 2.5 server a year ago, and I've come to question the practice of putting "Compression" in the "ActiveBundles" setting in Raven.Server.exe.config.
Is the default use of Compression known to lead to confusion or complications when upgrading?
The decision to enable Compression by default predated my time, but it seems to be the root cause of many failed attempts to upgrade servers from 2.5 (2996) to 3.x. The workaround that finally found was to restore backups to a fresh server, with Compression not configured by default in Raven.Server.config.
More specifically, and if someone experience the same scenario, this was my path:
- Backup all 2.5 databases
- STOP Raven
- Remove the 2.5 installation that had "Compression" configured as default
- Create a new (and empty) installation of 3.x, making sure to NOT include "Compress" as a default
- START Raven, creating a new 'system' database
- Restore each database from backups, excluding the old 'system' database
All of the documented or suggested methods of upgrading resulted in errors for me. Even using the export&import approach resulted in issues.
So.. I'm rather happy to have found an upgrade method that works. But I'm never leaving Compression turned on at the server level ever again. The migrated databases will need to put into compressed versions next, but I'm planning to do that on the individual database level. A practice that I have a feeling is more the standard.