Hi Senaka,

Yes, UES team is supposed to do this and have already completed most of the
base of it using cassandra. But, depending a AM's commitment, they wanted
to implement something quickly, AFAIK, probably within 2 weeks.

You can find the thread on that at @architecture "[Architecture] Developer
Forum for the API Store" [1]

[1] https://mail-archive.com/architecture%40wso2.org/msg03817.html


On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Senaka Fernando <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I think we are heading in the wrong direction here. IIRC, we discussed to
> implement a social component. The UES guys are or will be working on this.
> The idea was to keep this outside of the registry. Can you'll chat with
> Ruchira as well and try to understand how all of this fits together. The AM
> and the ES and the rest of the social aspects have to line up or these will
> increasingly become incompatible.
>
> And, WRT Uvindra's case. That solution was a highly subjective one
> Uvindra. As Ajith says, we cannot make it a generic solution and be done
> with that. This has to be solved properly. But, for the scenario of a forum
> I don't think any of that was discussed here is going to work as I have
> explained above.
>
> Thanks,
> Senaka.
>
>
> On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Ajith Vitharana <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nuwan,
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>  On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Uvindra,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with
>>>>> Ajith just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned
>>>>> we ran into the same limitation when developing the development governance
>>>>> solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could 
>>>>> not
>>>>> accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after 
>>>>> discussing
>>>>> with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of
>>>>> REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the
>>>>> solution accordingly.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping.
>>> Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt
>>> right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field.
>>> Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the
>>> rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than
>>> 1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and
>>> have to resort to other complicated measures.
>>>
>>> So I suggest that we make it a point to fix this urgently when
>>> appropriate. Kernel 4.3.0 or C5 at least. Sooner the better :)
>>>
>>
>> As I mentioned early, property is the storage model we used for RXT.
>> Storing the whole content as XML  (BLOB) and  parsing XML each time is NOT
>> a solution at all.
>> Registry schema is a generic one to platform and it can't be change the
>> with the requirement of all new features. So, what we can do is use the
>> existing feature combinations to support the new requirement.
>>
>> If you want to store the large content/doc with artifact, then store that
>> content as separate resource and build the dependency/association with the
>> artifacts.
>>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Ajith.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Ajith.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ajith,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
>>>>>> storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an 
>>>>>> artifact.
>>>>>> Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
>>>>>> This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So 
>>>>>> limiting
>>>>>> the characters to < 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a
>>>>>> good idea?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> NuwanD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Nuwan,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the
>>>>>>> data model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field 
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> a special case.
>>>>>>> So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this
>>>>>>> use case.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can't we limit the characters length for that  text-area ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>> Ajith.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get
>>>>>>>> the following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the 
>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column "REG_VALUE
>>>>>>>> VARCHAR(1000)": "STRINGDECODE('<table><tbody><tr><td
>>>>>>>> class=\""votecell\""><div class=\""vote\"">\n    <span
>>>>>>>> class=\""vote-count-post \"">2</span>\n    ... (1107)"; SQL statement:
>>>>>>>> INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID)
>>>>>>>> VALUES (?, ?, ?) [90005-140]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field
>>>>>>>> in the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the
>>>>>>>> database for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore 
>>>>>>>> basically its
>>>>>>>> not possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000 
>>>>>>>> characters
>>>>>>>> long.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I
>>>>>>>> see is to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why 
>>>>>>>> do we
>>>>>>>> need to have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we 
>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>> get rid of that, then we're good IMO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> NuwanD.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Ajith Vitharana.
>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
>>>>>>> Email  :  [email protected]
>>>>>>> Mobile : +94772217350
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Dev mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Uvindra
>>>>>
>>>>> Mobile: 777733962
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ajith Vitharana.
>>>> WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
>>>> Email  :  [email protected]
>>>> Mobile : +94772217350
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>
>>> Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>> email : [email protected]
>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ajith Vitharana.
>> WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
>> Email  :  [email protected]
>> Mobile : +94772217350
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> *[image: http://wso2.com] <http://wso2.com> Senaka Fernando*
> Software 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
>



-- 

*Ruchira Wageesha**Associate Technical Lead*
*WSO2 Inc. - lean . enterprise . middleware |  wso2.com <http://wso2.com>*

*email: [email protected] <[email protected]>,   blog:
ruchirawageesha.blogspot.com <http://ruchirawageesha.blogspot.com>,
mobile: +94 77 5493444*
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to