[fdo-internals] RE: PostGIS provider connection question

[Jason Birch]

I don't have any real objections to this, though I don't have a vested interest in the PostGIS provider at this point.  It would probably be best to go to the mapguide and fdo users lists for feedback from real PostGIS users.

The original design decision was made because we had limited resources after moving away from the initial decision to implement using the generic RDBMS framework.  It was easier not to support multiple databases (something about ListDataStores, a lack of cross-database query capabilities in PostgreSQL, getting a bit fuzzy now) and at the time I didn't have a requirement for multiple databases on the same server, or cross-schema data access from a single connection.

As a note, I believe that best practice is not to store the PostGIS support in the public schema, but in an alternate schema using a search path.  I'm not entirely up to date on this though.

Jason

From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Orest Halustchak
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 6:55 AM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: [fdo-internals] RE: PostGIS provider connection question

Hi,

Does anyone have any thoughts on the topic below?

Thanks,
Orest.

From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Orest Halustchak
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 11:06 AM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: [fdo-internals] PostGIS provider connection question

Hi,

I have a concern about the current connection parameters that the FDO PostGIS provider is using.

The current situation is this.

To make a connection to PostGIS we need to specify a service and a datastore.

The service is mapped to
 database at server:port

And the datastore to
                The physical postgis schema

So a typical connection would be
Service :              MyPGDatabase at MyServer:5432
Datastore :         public


But a PostGIS server can contain multiple databases with each database containing multiple schemas, which contain the tables. My question is why wouldn't we set up a connection mapping that exposes the PostGIS databases as FDO datastores and the PostGIS schemas as FDO schema, similar to how we do it with SQL Server, which has similar concepts.

So, connection information would be:
        Service:          server:port,                  e.g. MyServer:5432
        Datastore:    PG database name,   e.g. MyPGDatabase

Then, within that datastore, we have schemas called 'public' and any other schemas that the user has created there, such as "landbase", "transportation", "utilities", etc.


I realize that this has already been implemented and changing this could have some backwards compatibility issues with applications and MG resource definitions. But, maybe the benefits of having a better datastore / schema mapping to PG database / schema would be worth figuring out how to deal with the compatibility issues?

What do you think?

Thanks,
Orest.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20090707/acb69c64/attachment.html