Hi, On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Tommi Laukkanen <[email protected]> wrote: > I was talking with mikkopa and he suggested we should create two tables to > cover AssetBase to solve this issue properly. Namely AssetMetadata for > metadata information and AssetData for blobs to avoid situation where we end > up accessing also the blob data just to read metadata.
I was hoping not to have to do that. It should be straightforward to support the current AssetBase/AssetMetadata composition in the existing OpenSim data layers, but as sdague warned me earlier, by mapping multiple classes to one table I was entering a world of pain. Seems that's exactly what's happening with NHibernate. The reason I introduced the AssetMetadata class is to supply metadata information only for some requests that Cable Beach, the new asset server, supports. Now I realize that this was probably a premature optimization. Instead of modifying the DB schema, we could have AssetBase inherit from AssetMetadata, as I outlined before[1]. Alternatively, we could get rid of AssetMetadata altogether and store everything in AssetBase as before, splitting out the metadata sometime in the future when a use case warrants it. What do you think? Thanks, Mike [1] https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-dev/2009-February/004918.html _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
