hie

anyone on this please?

Thankx and Regards

Vik
Founder
www.sakshum.com
www.sakshum.blogspot.com


On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Vik <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hie
>
> I have a design question for your advise.
>
> I have a feature where i store details of Blood donors in the app engine.
>
> We got a requirement where we should be able to mark blood donors inactive
> for some period. So another three things need to be stored is:
>
> 1. isActive   (true or false)
> 2. InactivityReason  (some text)
> 3. ActiveDate  (a date at which isActive will be marked again true by a
> schedular).
>
>
> So now there are two ways to store this information
>
> First:  Having a separate entity with 4 attributes (above 3 plus one blood
> donor entity primary key ).
>
> This keeps this related data separate like a 1:1 relation. Updating this
> info will be simple however, to display only active blood donors
> will need a lot of processing.
>
> Second: Doing it the same way as above and also adding isActive attribute
> to the Blood Donor entity. so that quering only active donors
> is simple. However, this will make 2 entity updates for marking a blood
> donor inactive. The new entity plus blood donor entity (isActive field)
>
> Third: Just adding all the three attributes to the Blood donor entity and
> not creating any new entity type.  This keeps doing update as well as
> retrieval of active donors simple but kind of dis-obeys the OOPs or the
> natural logical separation of the information.
>
> From GAE scalabilbity perspective what is the right approach? What way we
> should design it. Please advise.
>
>
> Thankx and Regards
>
> Vik
> Founder
> www.sakshum.com
> www.sakshum.blogspot.com
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google App Engine for Java" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.

Reply via email to