Hello all, One thing we might try is to have an EA package for the merged "base" schema, and have additional packages for individual prototype extensions to the base.
Jeff > From: "Russell E. Owen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: LSST Data Management <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 11:41:54 -0800 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LSST-data] Re: UW database > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Jacek Becla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Nicole, Russ and Sergei >> >> Just to make sure... once we have the "merged" schema (UW+LLNL), >> will you be able to completely switch to using it? > > Not entirely. We need many things that LSST doesn't need, such as > different WCS tables and PSF model tables. > > Our plan is to make our database as similar to the schema as seems > practical. This will certainly involve some renaming (e.g. > detection->source, cluster->object). We may create a separate Source > table (rather than keeping sources and objects in the same table), but > the details of that depend on whether the merged schema has a place for > missing sources and objects from a reference catalog. > > As an aside, we just added an MJD field to our Image table. This is the > MJD date of the start of the night and provides an obvious unique > identifier for data from a particular night's observing. > > Regards, > > -- Russell > > _______________________________________________ > LSST-data mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.lsstmail.org/mailman/listinfo/lsst-data > _______________________________________________ LSST-data mailing list [email protected] http://www.lsstmail.org/mailman/listinfo/lsst-data
