This is taken from comments to:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-721
Since it is interesting I'm posting it here, to summon for discussion.
-----------------------------------------------------------
> Paolo Rizzi wrote
In DataStores derived from JDBCDataStore, and probably in all others as
well,
there is a default of false for returnFIDColumnsAsAttributes() for all
FIDMappers.
This should instead be configurable, so that one can decide upon it.
I know that with an explicit cast to JDBCDataStore you can call
setFIDMapper()
and change this behaviour, but this is cumborsome and also it's not
applicable
to all DataStores.
But the real bad thing is that it's not usable from GeoServer, since it's
not usable
from the DataStoreFactory.
In my opinion ALL parameters should be accessible through the
DataStoreFactory,
there should never be any case where one must configure a DataStore with
using
its DataStoreFactory.
-----------------------------------------------------------
> Jody Garnett wrote
FIDMappers should not exist - a DataStore should know what is going on for
its data. If there is configuration to be had it should take responsibility
for storing this information (or derriving it from the existing metadata).
This is a fundemental flaw in DataStore factory, the difference between
indentity (which data) and configuration (how you want it served up) is not
explicit. Have a look at GeoResouce interfaces for a smarter replacement for
DataStoreFactory.
Even so this is not a complete answer to the issue of configuration, I
basically agree with your last sentence (which is probably a typo). I think
one should specifiy with a DataStoreFactory and configure the DataStore
directly.
Note - this is a topic for the email lists....
-----------------------------------------------------------
> Paolo Rizzi wrote
Yes, sorry, it was a typo, the correct phrase was:
"..there should never be any case where one must configure a DataStore
WITHOUT using
its DataStoreFactory...".
Instead this is interesting:
"...This is a fundemental flaw in DataStore factory, the difference between
indentity
(which data) and configuration (how you want it served up) is not
explicit...".
So you're saying that there should be exactly just ONE instance of a
DataStore (hence just
ONE DB connection) for each DB and then there may exists several
HowWeWouldCallThem
that let's you see that single DataStore in different ways???
That sounds like mapping, something Gabriel is/will working on, or not???
I put this in the list, so it won't go unnoticed.
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D. LGS. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i
file/s allegato/i, sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro
utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le
finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceveste questo messaggio
senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia
via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso,
cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema; costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D. Lgs. 196/2003 il trattenere il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
