| using the Web Viewer with .rptdesign files that aren't real files [message #146249] |
Tue, 21 March 2006 03:31 |
 Holly Devereux
Messages: 7
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Hi All,
I'm relatively new to BIRT, but I'm really impressed with what I've
learned so far. I'm in the process of designing a system that hopefully
will use the out-of-the-box 2.0.1 BIRT Web Viewer with no or minimal
modifications.
One of the issues that I've run into is that the .rptdesign file must
reside in the file system. I've checked out and built the BIRT source,
and I've read through this newsgroup to see if there are any good ways
around this. I haven't found any yet, so I'd really appreciate any
suggestions that you might have.
Since we have to support a cluster of app servers, the .rptdesign files
will be stored in a database that's accessible to all instances. I've
been trying to find a way to pass the .rptdesign file contents (e.g. as
a String or InputStream) into the Web Viewer instead of having to write
them out to a file, and then passing in the path to the rest of the Web
Viewer.
I notice that one of ReportEngine's openReportDesign methods takes an
InputStream instead of a file name. However, I don't see anywhere in
the rest of the system that this method is used. A real file appears to
be mandated by ViewerAttributeBean and BirtContext(HttpServletRequest),
which means to make this work, I would need to generate a private BIRT
build after modifying several of the viewer and core BIRT classes. (I'd
rather not do this since it's not a very maintainable solution.)
Unless I'm missing something, and there is a way to do this, then I will
probably subclass ViewerServlet and override the get() and post()
methods. The overridden methods will read the latest report file from
the database, write it out to the file system, and then defer to the
ViewerServlet implementation to do the real work. Based on time-stamps
etc, I should only have to write out the file again if it's changed.
Given all of the other nice features of BIRT, I guess it's not a big
hassle to do this. Does this seem like a reasonable approach? Does
anyone else have a better idea?
Thanks in advance,
Holly
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03520 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
