Forgive me if I've misinterpreted your need, but if you won't be
having cross database relationships to your attachments, wouldn't this
best be modelled as what it is: an abstract attachment service perhaps
via a web service type interface? Used by lots of applications, you
abstract out the implementation (ERAttachment) and in the future can
implement it using something else....

Mark

-- 
Dr. Mark Wardle
Specialist registrar, Neurology
(Sent from my mobile)


On 19 Mar 2011, at 11:32, David Avendasora <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> We are currently using ERAttachment in one of our projects. The particular 
> app it is being used in has it's own DB which resides on a physically 
> separate server from most of the rest of our Schemas. This app works great, 
> and handles literally thousands of attachments per day (hence the reason for 
> it's own physical server and database).
>
> Now I want to use ERAttachment for another purpose. I want to put it in a 
> framework that could be used by many, if not all, of our applications, 
> including the system that currently uses ERAttachment. I can't use the 
> existing ERAttachment tables in this other, physically-seperate database 
> because EOF can't do the cross-database fetches it needs to.
>
> Theoretically, I could have the DBAs setup a cross-database link between the 
> two databases so EOF could get to the other Schema, but it wouldn't really 
> make sense from an organizational perspective to have just the attachments on 
> a different  server, that is for a completely different business purpose, 
> from all the rest of the new framework's tables.
>
> The problem is that ERAttachment seems to only allow you to configure one 
> connection dictionary for it. It doesn't appear that you can make use of the 
> "configurationName" functionality to have different sets of ERAttachment 
> tables.
>
> Am I missing how that can be implemented, or is it something that I shouldn't 
> even be attempting? It seems quite limiting to only allow one set of 
> ERAttachment tables per application.
>
> Dave _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mark%40wardle.org
>
> This email sent to [email protected]
 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to