I agree with you. Changing the return type of put and delete methods wouldn't be useful for all kinds of situations. To this first version I will let the implementation-data-xml support both interfaces DATA and Collection.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:30 AM, Douglas Leite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > I have started to integrate the Collection interface with > > implentation-data-xml. Although the methods present in the DATA > interface > > (get, insert, update, delete) can be replaced by the Collection > interface's > > methods (get, post, put, delete), there are some differences. The update > and > > delete DATA methods return the number of rows affected by each method. > On > > the other hand, this feature is not present using the Collection > methods, > > because put and delete are void. > > > > I guess what you are describing here is a side effect of Collection > being a more REST based interface and designed to perform put and > delete on a given resource, when the current DATA interface allows for > manipulating multiple rows at a time. Maybe we could have the > implementation-data-xml to support both DATA and Collection > interfaces, and let time and integration with real scenarios decide > witch one would be more useful. > > > Would be better change the signature of the put and delete Collection > > methods, allowing a K type return, or let a impl-data-xml component has > the > > two interfaces? > > > > I got a little confused here, as returning K (they key type) wouldn't > solve the first issue you raised. Anyway, looking at the current > Collection interface, key is used as a parameter thus known to the > caller. > > void put(K key, D item) throws NotFoundException; > > void delete(K key) throws NotFoundException; > > Then, I'm not sure about the benefits of changing it to return K. > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'd suggest the following as the next steps around > implementation-data-xml > > > > > > - Add support for data collection interface from implementation-data > > > - At this point, integration with binding-atom-abdera should be > > > working, it would be great to integrate this with our store tutorial, > > > either by enhancing the catalog-db or by creating a new module > > > catalog-db-xml. > > > - The exercise above should also help drive the requirements for > > > database schema that you are proposing with a concrete scenario. > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Douglas Leite <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > wrote: > > > > In my last contribution, I have proposed a first version of Update > and > > > > Insert methods for impl.data.xml component. > > > > One of the insert method limitations is that the table must only > have > > > > columns which types are char or varchar. However, I want to improve > > > this, > > > > allowing any sql primitive type. > > > > The fact is, the syntax to insert a varchar, for example, is > different > > > to > > > > insert a integer. So, it's necessary to know the types of the > column. > > > > I could resolve this problem in, at least, to different ways: > First, I > > > could > > > > use metadata information on the InsertInvoker, and discover the > types of > > > > columns. Another way to do this, is to add the column type > information > > > in > > > > the xml stream retrieved by the get method. So, we would have > something > > > like > > > > this: > > > > > > > > <resultSet> > > > > <record> > > > > <column name="NAME" type="VARCHAR">New Coorporation > I</column> > > > > <column name="PHONE" type="INTEGER">+5511990202146</column> > > > > . . . > > > > </record> > > > > </resultSet> > > > > > > > > I am not sure if other metadata informations should be added to the > xml > > > > stream. But, at the moment, I think that column type would be > useful. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Douglas Siqueira Leite > > > > Computer Science Master's degree student of University of Campinas > > > (Unicamp) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Luciano Resende > > > Apache Tuscany Committer > > > http://people.apache.org/~lresende<http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende>< > http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > > > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Douglas Siqueira Leite > > Computer Science Master's degree student of University of Campinas > (Unicamp) > > > > > > -- > Luciano Resende > Apache Tuscany Committer > http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > -- Douglas Siqueira Leite Computer Science Master's degree student of University of Campinas (Unicamp)
