Home » Eclipse Projects » DTP » Model Extensions?
| Model Extensions? [message #11649] |
Fri, 28 April 2006 18:22  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
how can the SQL Model of DTP be extended for a certain RDBMS vendor?
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Specialized_Database_Suppo rt#Model_Spe=
cialization
explains that the EMF model should be extended.
Somehow that would not do it for us, as we would like to have support fo=
r =
_multiple_ vendors in one model.
Even if we would extend the model for all RDBMS vendors that we need, I =
=
guess we could not reuse tools on top of DTP with our extended models:
- Tools would need to detect our extensions, but I'm not sure how easy =
that is with EMF.
- Tools could ignore our extensions, but at least then they should not =
remove our extensions when writing the file back
(AFAIK that can be done with EMF, but is not super trivial).
I would have expected to see more like an annotation mechanism, like in =
=
EMF or XML Schema.
That of course only works if extensions are simply structured, but I =
wonder if that would be sufficient.
Thanks for hints,
Stefan
|
|
|
| Re: Model Extensions? [message #11794 is a reply to message #11649] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 20:21  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
I don't quite understand what you would like to do, particularly the
part about support for multiple vendors in one model. Can you give me
an example?
Brian Payton
SQL Tools Development
IBM
Stefan Vaillant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> how can the SQL Model of DTP be extended for a certain RDBMS vendor?
>
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Specialized_Database_Suppo rt#Model_Specialization
>
> explains that the EMF model should be extended.
>
> Somehow that would not do it for us, as we would like to have support
> for _multiple_ vendors in one model.
> Even if we would extend the model for all RDBMS vendors that we need,
> I guess we could not reuse tools on top of DTP with our extended models:
> - Tools would need to detect our extensions, but I'm not sure how easy
> that is with EMF.
> - Tools could ignore our extensions, but at least then they should not
> remove our extensions when writing the file back
> (AFAIK that can be done with EMF, but is not super trivial).
>
> I would have expected to see more like an annotation mechanism, like
> in EMF or XML Schema.
> That of course only works if extensions are simply structured, but I
> wonder if that would be sufficient.
>
> Thanks for hints,
> Stefan
|
|
|
| Re: Model Extensions? [message #11830 is a reply to message #11794] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 14:06 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
lets assume I would extend the DTP SQLModel by adding Oracle Tablespaces=
, =
Partionioning and some Oracle CREATE TABLE specific attributes (extends,=
=
keepbuffer).
And lets assume I would do that by creating a new EMF (ecore) model.
Q1: How could can I use existing DTP tools to create and edit related =
files?
Q2: If I have these files, could they be reused by another person that =
(lets say) has done Sybase extensions?
Note on Q2: I agree that 90% of the database schema designers are happy =
=
with single database vendor support.
However, I'm from an ISV which wants to run its software on top of =
multiple RDBMS:s, and therefore we need to deploy one schema to differen=
t =
RDBMS:s, optionally using vendors specific extensions.
* Stefan
On Wed, 03 May 2006 02:21:16 +0200, Brian Payton <bpayton@us.ibm.com> =
wrote:
> I don't quite understand what you would like to do, particularly the =
> part about support for multiple vendors in one model. Can you give me=
=
> an example?
>
> Brian Payton
> SQL Tools Development
> IBM
>
> Stefan Vaillant wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> how can the SQL Model of DTP be extended for a certain RDBMS vendor?
>>
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Specialized_Database_Suppo rt#Model_=
Specialization =
>> explains that the EMF model should be extended.
>>
>> Somehow that would not do it for us, as we would like to have support=
=
>> for _multiple_ vendors in one model.
>> Even if we would extend the model for all RDBMS vendors that we need,=
I =
>> guess we could not reuse tools on top of DTP with our extended models=
:
>> - Tools would need to detect our extensions, but I'm not sure how eas=
y =
>> that is with EMF.
>> - Tools could ignore our extensions, but at least then they should no=
t =
>> remove our extensions when writing the file back
>> (AFAIK that can be done with EMF, but is not super trivial).
>>
>> I would have expected to see more like an annotation mechanism, like =
in =
>> EMF or XML Schema.
>> That of course only works if extensions are simply structured, but I =
=
>> wonder if that would be sufficient.
>>
>> Thanks for hints,
>> Stefan
|
|
|
| Re: Model Extensions? [message #12692 is a reply to message #11830] |
Fri, 05 May 2006 22:12 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Stefan,
This should be doable by creating an Oracle-specific model that extends
the base SQL model with only the new objects and attributes that don't
exist in the base model. We've done this with DB2. (It would be great
if someone from Oracle would supply the Oracle-specific model, but if
not, perhaps some Oracle experts in the community would like to
collaborate on creating it.) The other pieces that would be needed
would be a extension to the catalog loader to create the
Oracles-specific model objects on demand, and perhaps an extension to
the Data Source Explorer to show Oracle-specific elements in the Data
Source tree.
Since the Oracle-specific stuff is in an extension to the model, it's
not a whole new model. Existing tools should continue to work just fine
with the model, as long as they don't need to reference the new objects.
Tools are shielded from most database differences by using the
information in the DBDefinition model to check for database
capabilities, database limits, and the like. If they really need to
deal with specific database features and objects, they will need to have
some conditional code, but I don't see any way around that.
Regards,
Brian Payton
SQL Tools Development
IBM
Stefan Vaillant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> lets assume I would extend the DTP SQLModel by adding Oracle
> Tablespaces, Partionioning and some Oracle CREATE TABLE specific
> attributes (extends, keepbuffer).
> And lets assume I would do that by creating a new EMF (ecore) model.
>
> Q1: How could can I use existing DTP tools to create and edit related
> files?
> Q2: If I have these files, could they be reused by another person that
> (lets say) has done Sybase extensions?
>
> Note on Q2: I agree that 90% of the database schema designers are
> happy with single database vendor support.
> However, I'm from an ISV which wants to run its software on top of
> multiple RDBMS:s, and therefore we need to deploy one schema to
> different RDBMS:s, optionally using vendors specific extensions.
>
> * Stefan
>
>
>
> On Wed, 03 May 2006 02:21:16 +0200, Brian Payton <bpayton@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>> I don't quite understand what you would like to do, particularly the
>> part about support for multiple vendors in one model. Can you give
>> me an example?
>>
>> Brian Payton
>> SQL Tools Development
>> IBM
>>
>> Stefan Vaillant wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> how can the SQL Model of DTP be extended for a certain RDBMS vendor?
>>>
>>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Specialized_Database_Suppo rt#Model_Specialization
>>> explains that the EMF model should be extended.
>>>
>>> Somehow that would not do it for us, as we would like to have
>>> support for _multiple_ vendors in one model.
>>> Even if we would extend the model for all RDBMS vendors that we
>>> need, I guess we could not reuse tools on top of DTP with our
>>> extended models:
>>> - Tools would need to detect our extensions, but I'm not sure how
>>> easy that is with EMF.
>>> - Tools could ignore our extensions, but at least then they should
>>> not remove our extensions when writing the file back
>>> (AFAIK that can be done with EMF, but is not super trivial).
>>>
>>> I would have expected to see more like an annotation mechanism, like
>>> in EMF or XML Schema.
>>> That of course only works if extensions are simply structured, but I
>>> wonder if that would be sufficient.
>>>
>>> Thanks for hints,
>>> Stefan
>
|
|
|
| Re: Model Extensions? [message #573339 is a reply to message #11649] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 20:21 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
I don't quite understand what you would like to do, particularly the
part about support for multiple vendors in one model. Can you give me
an example?
Brian Payton
SQL Tools Development
IBM
Stefan Vaillant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> how can the SQL Model of DTP be extended for a certain RDBMS vendor?
>
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Specialized_Database_Suppo rt#Model_Specialization
>
> explains that the EMF model should be extended.
>
> Somehow that would not do it for us, as we would like to have support
> for _multiple_ vendors in one model.
> Even if we would extend the model for all RDBMS vendors that we need,
> I guess we could not reuse tools on top of DTP with our extended models:
> - Tools would need to detect our extensions, but I'm not sure how easy
> that is with EMF.
> - Tools could ignore our extensions, but at least then they should not
> remove our extensions when writing the file back
> (AFAIK that can be done with EMF, but is not super trivial).
>
> I would have expected to see more like an annotation mechanism, like
> in EMF or XML Schema.
> That of course only works if extensions are simply structured, but I
> wonder if that would be sufficient.
>
> Thanks for hints,
> Stefan
|
|
|
| Re: Model Extensions? [message #573369 is a reply to message #11794] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 14:06 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
lets assume I would extend the DTP SQLModel by adding Oracle Tablespaces=
, =
Partionioning and some Oracle CREATE TABLE specific attributes (extends,=
=
keepbuffer).
And lets assume I would do that by creating a new EMF (ecore) model.
Q1: How could can I use existing DTP tools to create and edit related =
files?
Q2: If I have these files, could they be reused by another person that =
(lets say) has done Sybase extensions?
Note on Q2: I agree that 90% of the database schema designers are happy =
=
with single database vendor support.
However, I'm from an ISV which wants to run its software on top of =
multiple RDBMS:s, and therefore we need to deploy one schema to differen=
t =
RDBMS:s, optionally using vendors specific extensions.
* Stefan
On Wed, 03 May 2006 02:21:16 +0200, Brian Payton <bpayton@us.ibm.com> =
wrote:
> I don't quite understand what you would like to do, particularly the =
> part about support for multiple vendors in one model. Can you give me=
=
> an example?
>
> Brian Payton
> SQL Tools Development
> IBM
>
> Stefan Vaillant wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> how can the SQL Model of DTP be extended for a certain RDBMS vendor?
>>
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Specialized_Database_Suppo rt#Model_=
Specialization =
>> explains that the EMF model should be extended.
>>
>> Somehow that would not do it for us, as we would like to have support=
=
>> for _multiple_ vendors in one model.
>> Even if we would extend the model for all RDBMS vendors that we need,=
I =
>> guess we could not reuse tools on top of DTP with our extended models=
:
>> - Tools would need to detect our extensions, but I'm not sure how eas=
y =
>> that is with EMF.
>> - Tools could ignore our extensions, but at least then they should no=
t =
>> remove our extensions when writing the file back
>> (AFAIK that can be done with EMF, but is not super trivial).
>>
>> I would have expected to see more like an annotation mechanism, like =
in =
>> EMF or XML Schema.
>> That of course only works if extensions are simply structured, but I =
=
>> wonder if that would be sufficient.
>>
>> Thanks for hints,
>> Stefan
|
|
|
| Re: Model Extensions? [message #573865 is a reply to message #11830] |
Fri, 05 May 2006 22:12 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Stefan,
This should be doable by creating an Oracle-specific model that extends
the base SQL model with only the new objects and attributes that don't
exist in the base model. We've done this with DB2. (It would be great
if someone from Oracle would supply the Oracle-specific model, but if
not, perhaps some Oracle experts in the community would like to
collaborate on creating it.) The other pieces that would be needed
would be a extension to the catalog loader to create the
Oracles-specific model objects on demand, and perhaps an extension to
the Data Source Explorer to show Oracle-specific elements in the Data
Source tree.
Since the Oracle-specific stuff is in an extension to the model, it's
not a whole new model. Existing tools should continue to work just fine
with the model, as long as they don't need to reference the new objects.
Tools are shielded from most database differences by using the
information in the DBDefinition model to check for database
capabilities, database limits, and the like. If they really need to
deal with specific database features and objects, they will need to have
some conditional code, but I don't see any way around that.
Regards,
Brian Payton
SQL Tools Development
IBM
Stefan Vaillant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> lets assume I would extend the DTP SQLModel by adding Oracle
> Tablespaces, Partionioning and some Oracle CREATE TABLE specific
> attributes (extends, keepbuffer).
> And lets assume I would do that by creating a new EMF (ecore) model.
>
> Q1: How could can I use existing DTP tools to create and edit related
> files?
> Q2: If I have these files, could they be reused by another person that
> (lets say) has done Sybase extensions?
>
> Note on Q2: I agree that 90% of the database schema designers are
> happy with single database vendor support.
> However, I'm from an ISV which wants to run its software on top of
> multiple RDBMS:s, and therefore we need to deploy one schema to
> different RDBMS:s, optionally using vendors specific extensions.
>
> * Stefan
>
>
>
> On Wed, 03 May 2006 02:21:16 +0200, Brian Payton <bpayton@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>> I don't quite understand what you would like to do, particularly the
>> part about support for multiple vendors in one model. Can you give
>> me an example?
>>
>> Brian Payton
>> SQL Tools Development
>> IBM
>>
>> Stefan Vaillant wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> how can the SQL Model of DTP be extended for a certain RDBMS vendor?
>>>
>>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Specialized_Database_Suppo rt#Model_Specialization
>>> explains that the EMF model should be extended.
>>>
>>> Somehow that would not do it for us, as we would like to have
>>> support for _multiple_ vendors in one model.
>>> Even if we would extend the model for all RDBMS vendors that we
>>> need, I guess we could not reuse tools on top of DTP with our
>>> extended models:
>>> - Tools would need to detect our extensions, but I'm not sure how
>>> easy that is with EMF.
>>> - Tools could ignore our extensions, but at least then they should
>>> not remove our extensions when writing the file back
>>> (AFAIK that can be done with EMF, but is not super trivial).
>>>
>>> I would have expected to see more like an annotation mechanism, like
>>> in EMF or XML Schema.
>>> That of course only works if extensions are simply structured, but I
>>> wonder if that would be sufficient.
>>>
>>> Thanks for hints,
>>> Stefan
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Apr 16 15:55:49 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.05470 seconds |
Home