Skip to content

Conversation

@crazybarber
Copy link
Owner

No description provided.

@crazybarber crazybarber requested a review from savoc May 30, 2019 20:57
@crazybarber crazybarber changed the title initial prototype Repo Jun 3, 2019

type ImplementationStatusDictionary struct {
Id ImplementationStatus `sql:",pk"`
Status string // Arbitrary name/tag for the source system
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

source system? not status'?

type Field struct {
Id uint64 `json:"-"`
Name string `sql:",unique"` // The name of a field according to the wide-row design
Name string `sql:",pk"` // The name of a field according to the wide-row design
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How are you going to distinguish between 2 fields with the same name - the first one being a 'top level' field and the the other one being nested somewhere? Will Name contain the entire field path so field_A and field_B.field_A will end up having different Names?

GetEventTypes() ([]model.EventType, error)
GetFields() ([]model.Field, error)
GetEventTypeImplementations(sourceSystemName string) ([]model.EventTypeImplementation, error)
GetFieldImplementations(sourceSystemName string, fieldName string) ([]model.FieldImplementation, error)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should it really be taking sourceSystemName? fieldImplementation is already connecting a sourceSystem with a field so if you provide both sourceSystemName and fieldName to this function you'll end up with either 0 or 1 FieldImplementations.

Edit: OK, my bad - I didn't notice the EventTypeName in fieldImplementation... maybe because I'm not convinced that it's a good idea to have it there in the first place.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants