Re: [Architecture] Increasing size of VALUE column of AM_BLOCK_CONDITIONS table
Yes if we have constraints it may effect. But i also feel 512 is enough.
Thanks,
sanjeewa.
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
wrote:
> yeah, practically 512 should be sufficient.
>
> On 1 December 2016 at 16:59, Nuwan Dias wrote:
>
>> Ok, how about 512 :) ? I'm ok to increase length but as needed only. The
>> reason being that the column length becomes a problem on certain database
>> types if/when we use that column in certain constraints (ex: unique
>> constraint).
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Blocking condition values will include the tenant domain for API context
>>> blocking(/t/${tenantDomain}/${context}) and tenant qualified username
>>> for Application blocking (${userName}:${applicationName}). Especially
>>> if email username based tenant users are there, value can grow more.
>>> Hence suggesting a higher value.
>>>
>>> On 1 December 2016 at 16:43, Nuwan Dias wrote:
>>>
Isn't 256 enough? Since the application or api name length is 200?
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
wrote:
> Shall we do the $subject?
>
> Currently the 'value' column size is varchar(45), which is not
> sufficient for most possible combinations, given that we allow API name
> and
> Application name themselves 200/100 chars.
>
> So I think we can increase 'value' cloumn size to 1024.
> We can include an alter query for 2.1.0 default script for migration.
>
> Any concerns?
>
> Thanks,
> Lakmali
> --
> Lakmali Baminiwatta
> Associate Technical Lead
> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> mobile: +94 71 2335936
> blog : lakmali.com
>
>
--
Nuwan Dias
Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>> Associate Technical Lead
>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>> mobile: +94 71 2335936
>>> blog : lakmali.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nuwan Dias
>>
>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>> email : nuw...@wso2.com
>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lakmali Baminiwatta
> Associate Technical Lead
> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> mobile: +94 71 2335936
> blog : lakmali.com
>
>
--
*Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
WSO2 Inc.
Mobile : +94713068779
Re: [Architecture] Increasing size of VALUE column of AM_BLOCK_CONDITIONS table
For now there are no constraints for that table. Anyway 512 should be
sufficient.
On 2 December 2016 at 09:22, Sanjeewa Malalgoda wrote:
> Yes if we have constraints it may effect. But i also feel 512 is enough.
>
> Thanks,
> sanjeewa.
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
> wrote:
>
>> yeah, practically 512 should be sufficient.
>>
>> On 1 December 2016 at 16:59, Nuwan Dias wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, how about 512 :) ? I'm ok to increase length but as needed only. The
>>> reason being that the column length becomes a problem on certain database
>>> types if/when we use that column in certain constraints (ex: unique
>>> constraint).
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>> wrote:
>>>
Blocking condition values will include the tenant domain for API
context blocking(/t/${tenantDomain}/${context}) and tenant qualified
username for Application blocking (${userName}:${applicationName}).
Especially if email username based tenant users are there, value can grow
more.
Hence suggesting a higher value.
On 1 December 2016 at 16:43, Nuwan Dias wrote:
> Isn't 256 enough? Since the application or api name length is 200?
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
> wrote:
>
>> Shall we do the $subject?
>>
>> Currently the 'value' column size is varchar(45), which is not
>> sufficient for most possible combinations, given that we allow API name
>> and
>> Application name themselves 200/100 chars.
>>
>> So I think we can increase 'value' cloumn size to 1024.
>> We can include an alter query for 2.1.0 default script for migration.
>>
>>
>> Any concerns?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lakmali
>> --
>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>> Associate Technical Lead
>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> mobile: +94 71 2335936
>> blog : lakmali.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Nuwan Dias
>
> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
> email : nuw...@wso2.com
> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>
--
Lakmali Baminiwatta
Associate Technical Lead
WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
lean.enterprise.middleware
mobile: +94 71 2335936
blog : lakmali.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>
>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>> email : nuw...@wso2.com
>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>> Associate Technical Lead
>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> mobile: +94 71 2335936
>> blog : lakmali.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> *Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
> WSO2 Inc.
> Mobile : +94713068779 <+94%2071%20306%208779>
>
>
Re: [Architecture] Increasing size of VALUE column of AM_BLOCK_CONDITIONS table
yeah, practically 512 should be sufficient.
On 1 December 2016 at 16:59, Nuwan Dias wrote:
> Ok, how about 512 :) ? I'm ok to increase length but as needed only. The
> reason being that the column length becomes a problem on certain database
> types if/when we use that column in certain constraints (ex: unique
> constraint).
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
> wrote:
>
>> Blocking condition values will include the tenant domain for API context
>> blocking(/t/${tenantDomain}/${context}) and tenant qualified username
>> for Application blocking (${userName}:${applicationName}). Especially if
>> email username based tenant users are there, value can grow more.
>> Hence suggesting a higher value.
>>
>> On 1 December 2016 at 16:43, Nuwan Dias wrote:
>>
>>> Isn't 256 enough? Since the application or api name length is 200?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>> wrote:
>>>
Shall we do the $subject?
Currently the 'value' column size is varchar(45), which is not
sufficient for most possible combinations, given that we allow API name and
Application name themselves 200/100 chars.
So I think we can increase 'value' cloumn size to 1024.
We can include an alter query for 2.1.0 default script for migration.
Any concerns?
Thanks,
Lakmali
--
Lakmali Baminiwatta
Associate Technical Lead
WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
lean.enterprise.middleware
mobile: +94 71 2335936
blog : lakmali.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>
>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>> email : nuw...@wso2.com
>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>> Associate Technical Lead
>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> mobile: +94 71 2335936
>> blog : lakmali.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Nuwan Dias
>
> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
> email : nuw...@wso2.com
> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>
--
Lakmali Baminiwatta
Associate Technical Lead
WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
lean.enterprise.middleware
mobile: +94 71 2335936
blog : lakmali.com
___
Architecture mailing list
Architecture@wso2.org
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
Re: [Architecture] Increasing size of VALUE column of AM_BLOCK_CONDITIONS table
Ok, how about 512 :) ? I'm ok to increase length but as needed only. The
reason being that the column length becomes a problem on certain database
types if/when we use that column in certain constraints (ex: unique
constraint).
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
wrote:
> Blocking condition values will include the tenant domain for API context
> blocking(/t/${tenantDomain}/${context}) and tenant qualified username for
> Application blocking (${userName}:${applicationName}). Especially if
> email username based tenant users are there, value can grow more.
> Hence suggesting a higher value.
>
> On 1 December 2016 at 16:43, Nuwan Dias wrote:
>
>> Isn't 256 enough? Since the application or api name length is 200?
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Shall we do the $subject?
>>>
>>> Currently the 'value' column size is varchar(45), which is not
>>> sufficient for most possible combinations, given that we allow API name and
>>> Application name themselves 200/100 chars.
>>>
>>> So I think we can increase 'value' cloumn size to 1024.
>>> We can include an alter query for 2.1.0 default script for migration.
>>>
>>> Any concerns?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lakmali
>>> --
>>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>> Associate Technical Lead
>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>> mobile: +94 71 2335936
>>> blog : lakmali.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nuwan Dias
>>
>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>> email : nuw...@wso2.com
>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lakmali Baminiwatta
> Associate Technical Lead
> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> mobile: +94 71 2335936
> blog : lakmali.com
>
>
--
Nuwan Dias
Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Architecture mailing list
Architecture@wso2.org
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
Re: [Architecture] Increasing size of VALUE column of AM_BLOCK_CONDITIONS table
Blocking condition values will include the tenant domain for API context
blocking(/t/${tenantDomain}/${context}) and tenant qualified username for
Application blocking (${userName}:${applicationName}). Especially if email
username based tenant users are there, value can grow more.
Hence suggesting a higher value.
On 1 December 2016 at 16:43, Nuwan Dias wrote:
> Isn't 256 enough? Since the application or api name length is 200?
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta
> wrote:
>
>> Shall we do the $subject?
>>
>> Currently the 'value' column size is varchar(45), which is not sufficient
>> for most possible combinations, given that we allow API name and
>> Application name themselves 200/100 chars.
>>
>> So I think we can increase 'value' cloumn size to 1024.
>> We can include an alter query for 2.1.0 default script for migration.
>>
>> Any concerns?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lakmali
>> --
>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>> Associate Technical Lead
>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> mobile: +94 71 2335936
>> blog : lakmali.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Nuwan Dias
>
> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
> email : nuw...@wso2.com
> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>
--
Lakmali Baminiwatta
Associate Technical Lead
WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
lean.enterprise.middleware
mobile: +94 71 2335936
blog : lakmali.com
___
Architecture mailing list
Architecture@wso2.org
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
Re: [Architecture] Increasing size of VALUE column of AM_BLOCK_CONDITIONS table
Isn't 256 enough? Since the application or api name length is 200? On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta wrote: > Shall we do the $subject? > > Currently the 'value' column size is varchar(45), which is not sufficient > for most possible combinations, given that we allow API name and > Application name themselves 200/100 chars. > > So I think we can increase 'value' cloumn size to 1024. > We can include an alter query for 2.1.0 default script for migration. > > Any concerns? > > Thanks, > Lakmali > -- > Lakmali Baminiwatta > Associate Technical Lead > WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com > lean.enterprise.middleware > mobile: +94 71 2335936 > blog : lakmali.com > > -- Nuwan Dias Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com email : nuw...@wso2.com Phone : +94 777 775 729 ___ Architecture mailing list Architecture@wso2.org https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
