UniverseUniversity


Home Projects Jobs Clientele Contact

uu


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

Re: UMO interface functions



I am not saying it shouldn't be designed explicitly. I'm saying it can be
done inside of one stored procedure which gets child_UMO type and ID,
parent_UMO type and ID as parameters.
Otherwise we are going to have 20-30 attach/detach stored procedures
instead of 2.

> Correct, we cannot attach everything to everything. Any potential linking
> has to be designed explicitly.
>
> Alexey Parshin wrote:
>> I'm not sure if we can attach any UMO to any other UMO. For Instance -
>> attaching a topic to an explanation, or attaching an explanation to
>> problem doesn't make much sense to me.
>> In the present structure of the database, we have only certain
>> connections between UMOs allowed. If we need ANY-2-ANY type of
>> connection - then we need a different DB structure.
>>
>> 2007/4/29, sergey@total-knowledge.com
>> <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com> <sergey@total-knowledge.com
>> <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com>>:
>>
>>     Regarding topic_attach_to_topic() and topic_detach_from_topic()
>>     types of
>>     stored procedures.
>>     Since most of the UMOs(like problems, tests, dialogs, etc) can be
>>     attached
>>     to any other UMO except themself, imho it makes sense to have only 2
>>     attach/detach stored procedures:
>>     umo_attach() and umo_detach().
>>     Attach should be performed only if child UMO is allowed to be
>>     attched to
>>     provided parent UMO.
>>
>>
>>     > It's not going to work for every UMO. For example, problems have
>>     more
>>     > complicated functionality. Also course is much different from
>>     others.
>>     >
>>     >> Hello,
>>     >>
>>     >> It looks like we have to standardize the set of the UMO
>>     functions. Here
>>     >> is
>>     >> the typical list that is implemented for topic_list,
>>     topic_explanation,
>>     >> and
>>     >> dialog_of_texts:
>>     >>
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION <UMO>_create(int,varchar(80),text) TO
>>     PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION <UMO>_delete(int) TO PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION <UMO>_create_version(int) TO PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION <UMO>_publish_version(int) TO PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION
>>     <UMO>_add_content(int,int,varchar(80),text) TO
>>     >> PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION
>>     <UMO>_modify_content(int,int,varchar(80),text)
>>     >> TO
>>     >> PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION <UMO>_delete_content(int) TO PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION <UMO>_attach_to_<parent
>>     >> UMO>(int,int,int,int,int)
>>     >> TO PUBLIC;
>>     >> GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION <UMO>_detach_from_<parent
>>     UMO>(int,int) TO
>>     >> PUBLIC;
>>     >>
>>     >> Please, notice: In order to match this standard I had to modify
>>     names of
>>     >> few
>>     >> topic_* functions, related to content and attach/detach.
>>     >>
>>     >> --
>>     >> Alexey Parshin,
>>     >> http://www.sptk.net
>>     >>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alexey Parshin,
>> http://www.sptk.net
>
> --
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> Total Knowledge. CTO
> http://www.total-knowledge.com
>
>



Authoright © Total Knowledge: 2001-2008