Hi Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. Incorporate the data exchange fields within the Object tables (certificate, csr, ca_certificate etc).
This is a real problem because you must alter the database for every node which you add too the hierarchy. The problem is that some database has limits related to columns and the total size of a column.
The major issue is that I don't like dynamic database schemas. A database schema should not depend on changes of the content.
2. The data exchange fields would describe the exchange status with each node. 3. When a record is created in the Object tables the data exchange fields are set to a not exchanged default.
Same like your last idea without the dynamic schema.
4. The data exchange routine only then needs a single query (per object type) to determin if an export is required, rather then the cross table query.
The design from yesterday needs only a single query too. Only the maintenance command needs more time and the maintenance command is no longer needed (after your idea from yesterday).
5. When the data exchange routines are run, they update the data exchange status of each of the object records.
Same like the old idea.
Am I missing something or being stupid in pushing this ?
None of both, it is more a question of personal preference - dynamic schema vs. statical schema and more rows.
Michael -- _______________________________________________________________ Michael Bell Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin Tel.: +49 (0)30-2093 2482 ZE Computer- und Medienservice Fax: +49 (0)30-2093 2704 Unter den Linden 6 [EMAIL PROTECTED] D-10099 Berlin _______________________________________________________________
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
