[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-4623?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Allen Liang updated ATLAS-4623:
-------------------------------
Description:
Hi there,
When compared with the implementation of classification in terms of applicable
entity type, business metadata has a different implementation that
1) When applicable entity type is set to empty/null, none of entity types will
be applicable (while all entity types will be applicable in classification)
2) When applicable entity type is set to a specific entity type, that specific
entity type and each of its derived entity types will be added the business
attributes in their entity definition response (while classification doesn't
have this behavior)
I have the following questions
For 1), would it make more sense to align with classification's behavior (i.e.,
empty/null means no restriction to all entity types)?
For 2), due to 1) if one wants to make business attributes apply to all entity
types today, the closest thing he could do would be setting applicable type to
"Referenceable", and that would cause the expansion of all entity type
definition due to 2). What's the best practice here?
And in general, I am trying to understand what's the rationale behind this
different applicableEntityType implementation in business metadata compared to
classification? And do we consider changing to the similar implementation to
align with classification's behavior (which seems more reasonable) as an
improvement in future release?
was:
Hi there,
When compared with the implementation of classification in terms of applicable
entity type, business metadata has a different implementation that
1) When applicable entity type is set to empty/null, none of entity types will
be applicable (while all entity types will be applicable in classification)
2) When applicable entity type is set to a specific entity type, that specific
entity type and each of its derived entity types will be added the business
attributes in their entity definition response (while classification doesn't
have this behavior)
I have the following questions
For 1), would it make more sense to align with classification's behavior (i.e.,
empty/null means no restriction to all entity types)?
For 2), Due to 1) if one wants to make business attributes apply to all entity
types today, the closest thing he could do would be setting applicable type to
"Referenceable", and that would cause the expansion of all entity type
definition due to 2). What's the best practice here?
And in general, I am trying to understand what's the rationale behind this
different applicableEntityType implementation in business metadata compared to
classification? And do we consider changing to the similar implementation to
align with classification's behavior (which seems more reasonable) as an
improvement in future release?
> Different business metadata behavior of applicableEntityTypes compared to
> classification
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ATLAS-4623
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-4623
> Project: Atlas
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: atlas-core
> Affects Versions: 2.2.0
> Reporter: Allen Liang
> Priority: Major
>
> Hi there,
> When compared with the implementation of classification in terms of
> applicable entity type, business metadata has a different implementation that
> 1) When applicable entity type is set to empty/null, none of entity types
> will be applicable (while all entity types will be applicable in
> classification)
> 2) When applicable entity type is set to a specific entity type, that
> specific entity type and each of its derived entity types will be added the
> business attributes in their entity definition response (while classification
> doesn't have this behavior)
>
> I have the following questions
> For 1), would it make more sense to align with classification's behavior
> (i.e., empty/null means no restriction to all entity types)?
> For 2), due to 1) if one wants to make business attributes apply to all
> entity types today, the closest thing he could do would be setting applicable
> type to "Referenceable", and that would cause the expansion of all entity
> type definition due to 2). What's the best practice here?
>
> And in general, I am trying to understand what's the rationale behind this
> different applicableEntityType implementation in business metadata compared
> to classification? And do we consider changing to the similar implementation
> to align with classification's behavior (which seems more reasonable) as an
> improvement in future release?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)
