On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:06 PM, Senaka Fernando <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Sagara, Prasanna,
>
> So, there were two issues here actually.
>
>    1. Firstly, this is the very first time we are going to introduce a
>    new kind of DB for G-Reg. G-Reg, unlike many other products has a role of
>    providing a federated repository against which everything else runs, so any
>    DB or anything of that sort needs to be federated as well. So, though it
>    may be easy enough for other products to introduce DBs it is not easy for
>    G-Reg to do the same. My questions were to understand why we can't use the
>    existing APIs and whether a new table/column is required for anything at
>    all.
>
> @Prasanna, I also agree, you still haven't make your point clear why you
need a new table you have to justify your approach also elaborate how it
works in a clustered setup.

@Senaka, I still didn't get clear picture about your concern about federated
repository, appreciate if you can elaborate more.


>
>    1.
>    2. If we have to introduce a DB however, we must, and that has to
>    follow the GOV_ standard. This should be similar to API-M or IS in the way
>    it is setup (i.e. separate datasource etc).
>
> So, given the explanation I think you guys have found the need for a DB,
> but it is a must to pay attention to the sharing aspects in addition to the
> naming aspects before going ahead with this.
>
> Thanks,
> Senaka.
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Sagara Gunathunga <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Prasanna Dangalla <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I need to introduce a new table which is *only* needed for
>>> carbon-governance. AFAIK currently all the database scripts are in
>>> carbon-kernel [1]. AFAIU new table should be managed separately in
>>> carbon-governance with the introduction of  a new prefix like GOV_.
>>>
>>> Feedback on this approach is highly appreciated.
>>>
>>
>> Here is my generic suggestion, G-Reg is a separate product and has lot
>> more features than Registry hence it's valid requirement to have own data
>> and own tables also GOV_ prefix in order to properly distinguish. IMO It is
>> incorrect to include G-Reg  specific scripts  into carbon-kernel script. We
>> already have this kind of separation in IS among user-mgt and identity
>> tables.
>>
>> Thanks !
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] -
>>> https://github.com/wso2/carbon4-kernel/tree/master/distribution/kernel/carbon-home/dbscripts
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> --
>>> Prasanna Dangalla
>>> Software Engineer, WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com/
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>
>>> cell: +94 777 55 80 30 | +94 718 11 27 51
>>> twitter: @prasa77
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sagara Gunathunga
>>
>> Senior Technical Lead; WSO2, Inc.;  http://wso2.com
>> V.P Apache Web Services;    http://ws.apache.org/
>> Linkedin; http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssagara
>> Blog ;  http://ssagara.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> *[image: http://wso2.com] <http://wso2.com>Senaka Fernando*
> Solutions Architect; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>
>
>
> *Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://apache.org
> <http://apache.org>E-mail: senaka AT wso2.com <http://wso2.com>**P: +1
> 408 754 7388 <%2B1%20408%20754%207388>; ext: 51736*;
>
>
> *M: +44 782 741 1966 <%2B44%20782%20741%201966>Linked-In:
> http://linkedin.com/in/senakafernando
> <http://linkedin.com/in/senakafernando>*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware
>



-- 
Sagara Gunathunga

Senior Technical Lead; WSO2, Inc.;  http://wso2.com
V.P Apache Web Services;    http://ws.apache.org/
Linkedin; http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssagara
Blog ;  http://ssagara.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to