[Mapbender-dev] PKs for all tables?

[Uli Rothstein (WhereGroup)]

Hi Marko,

Samson, Marko schrieb:
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: mapbender_dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org 
>> [mailto:mapbender_dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] Im Auftrag von 
>> Uli Rothstein (WhereGroup)
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. Januar 2007 10:11
>> An: Mapbender Developer List
>> Betreff: Re: [Mapbender-dev] Test of RC1 / some thoughts
>>
>> dear list-members,
>>
>> Marc Jansen schrieb:
>>> Hey Marko, hey List,
>>>>  
>>>> 2. Test of upgrading a 2.4 version
>>>>     - everything seems to work fine, too. (The first time 
>> I did the 
>>>> upgrade, I had all entries of gui_layers twice. Don't know, what I 
>>>> did wrong. Whatever, the second time everything worked 
>> pretty nice. )
>>>>  
>>>> Idea:
>>>>  I saw, that you set "default_with_oids = true" in the new pgsql 
>>>> schema, but wouldn't there be a chance for grouped 
>> primary-keys for 
>>>> all the pk-less tables, for example the table gui_layer with a 
>>>> grouped-pk of fkey_gui_id and fkey_layer_id to prevent 
>> double entries.
>>>> (same idea for all other tables without PK like
>>>> gui_layer,gui_wfs,gui_wms,...)
>>> I second that, if there are no other relevant issues. I can not see 
>>> any
>>> -- do you? A grouped PK should be the right way to handle 
>> theses tables.
>>>>  Or is there a reason, why there are no PKs at some tables? In my 
>>>> opinion, there is no logic of having two entries, for example with 
>>>> the same fkey_gui_id and fkey_layer_id in table gui_layer.
>>>>
>>> Yipp, speaking from a database view of things, one does not 
>> need two 
>>> entries with the same values in the field you named. Am I missing 
>>> something?
>> I don't now. There may be some technical reasons to publish a 
>> layer twice, because nonexisting transparency of services for 
>> example. So you have more flexibility for the arrangement of 
>> layers. (But I've never seen such constructions in reality...)
> 
> But this now can be managed very easy with the new treefolder to move the different layers up or down to handle that problem(additional to the wms_preferences modul). Or have I misunderstood what you meant?

You're right. But we have some more GeoDataExplorer, for example the 
configurable one... Howerver, if we don't need to publish layer twice, we should 
have a unique fkey_wms_id - fkey_layer_id combination.

> 
> But there are several tables without pks. I think, for a stable datastructure it is advantageous to have pks at every table. 

That's definitively true. Is someone able to list the missing pks and to create 
the corresponding sql-statements, if all dev-members agree?

Thanks for your hints Marko and best regards
Uli

> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mapbender_dev mailing list
> Mapbender_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapbender_dev


-- 
---------------------------------
        Ulrich Rothstein
    WhereGroup GmbH & Co.KG
        Siemensstraße 8
         53121 Bonn
           GERMANY
---------------------------------
    uli.rothstein at wheregroup.com
          uli at osgeo.org
        www.wheregroup.com
        www.mapbender.org
---------------------------------
Zentrale:  ++49 (0) 228 909038 0
Durchwahl: ++49 (0) 228 909038 17
Fax:       ++49 (0) 228 909038 11
---------------------------------

ACHTUNG: Die Firmen Geo-Consortium, CCGIS und KARTA.GO haben ihre Fusion als 
WhereGroup zum 1.1.2007 bekannt gegeben.
Daher ändern sich ab Januar 2007 die Email Adressen und Telefonnummern.