> On April 27, 2017, 8:25 p.m., Hao Hao wrote:
> > sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/008-SENTRY-1569.derby.sql
> > Lines 30 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58808/diff/1/?file=1702015#file1702015line30>
> >
> >     Can you explain more about why using 'signleton'and why have '15' 
> > length restriction here? And add a comment to it.

Idea is to restrict the the table to have only one record which has the last 
notification-id that sentry processed. Applicaiton should do an insert at the 
begining and later it should be only updates to existing record.

To restrict the table to have only one record I have taken below approach
1. Added RESTRICTION column and made it a primary key
2. Have set a default value for that column.
3. JDO definition for this table will not have feild in the class for the 
column RESTRICTION, so application will just know NOTIFICATION_ID in the table.
4. If application tries to insert another entry into table yy mistake it will 
fail.


- kalyan kumar


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/58808/#review173252
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 28, 2017, 8:30 p.m., kalyan kumar kalvagadda wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/58808/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 28, 2017, 8:30 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for sentry, Alexander Kolbasov, Hao Hao, Na Li, Sergio Pena, 
> Vamsee Yarlagadda, and Vadim Spector.
> 
> 
> Bugs: SENTRY-1726
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-1726
> 
> 
> Repository: sentry
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> 1. Created new table to store the last notification id
> 2. Table is defined to store only one entry.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/008-SENTRY-1569.derby.sql
>  ba70715 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/008-SENTRY-1569.mysql.sql
>  879e732 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/008-SENTRY-1569.oracle.sql
>  e83ab83 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/008-SENTRY-1569.postgres.sql
>  c28099b 
>   sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/sentry-db2-1.8.0.sql 
> 841dcaa 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/sentry-derby-1.8.0.sql 
> 223835e 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/sentry-mysql-1.8.0.sql 
> 006d57b 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/sentry-oracle-1.8.0.sql 
> 20921ea 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/sentry-postgres-1.8.0.sql
>  489ad66 
>   
> sentry-provider/sentry-provider-db/src/main/resources/sentry-upgrade-db2-1.7.0-to-1.8.0.sql
>  ec50912 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/58808/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> tested the sql changes with the all databases sentry supports.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> kalyan kumar kalvagadda
> 
>

Reply via email to