Re: Mutiple ERAttachment DBs
Re: Mutiple ERAttachment DBs
- Subject: Re: Mutiple ERAttachment DBs
- From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 20:25:36 -0700
On Mar 21, 2011, at 6:55 PM, David Avendasora wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2011, at 5:09 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>> On Mar 19, 2011, at 4:32 AM, David Avendasora 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.
>>
>> Not really sure what you are trying to do. :-)
>
> Most people find that to be the case most of the time. I admire your fortitude to repeatedly wade into my ramblings.
Is fortitude 'merican for masochism?
>> You want to use a model twice in the same app but pointing to different tables?
>
> Well, yeah. But when you say it like that it sounds kinda dirty, or something.
Yeah, something.
>> If you use different tables, then you need different entity names or you need the models to be in a different EOModel group, no?
>
> Well, I guess I could just programmatically create a copy of the ERAttachment model at launch with a new name based on a property that would need to be set in any project that has ERAttachment.framework on it's classpath. During the creation of this new EOModel, I could rename the existing entities by prefixing the names just like I would do for the EOModel itself.
I don't have any other brillant ideas at the moment. You will also have to deal some of the critical code not working as it relies on _ERAttachment.ENTITY_NAME and will create objects in the "wrong" database.
> This way I could have different ERAttachment table sets for distinct, independent functionality! Doesn't that sound like something everybody would want?
It sounds useful, but cloning the model sounds like a direct path to a bad place. I think you need a Plan B here. Like being able to set where the attachment goes when it is created. I don't know ERAttachment well enough to offer any actually useful advice.
Chuck
--
Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden