Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
Hi, I have got around the problem by storing the content as a separate registry resource. The only drawback in this case is that we'll have to write a separate indexer for searching by content. The forum topic and other metadata still reside within the artifact and therefore indexing/searching is not a problem. So basically the problem is solved. The problem I wanted to highlight. - As per my understanding the 'text' field and 'text-area' field in artifacts have no differences. They both can store only a limited number of characters. Am I right? If so, for someone using the registry to store artifacts it looks misleading and makes them think that limiting a text-area content length is wrong. I understand that this behavior is by design and it is overly complicated to change this :). Why we used the registry? -- The registry already has in built capabilities for searching/indexing, sorting, pagination, categorization through tags, artifact permissions, etc. We also had the need of a permission model (coupled with APIs) for the forum. And on top of that we needed to get this forum implemented pretty fast (~2 weeks). When the registry already has all these capabilities, why would we reinvent everything on top of something else? Besides, having it in the registry makes it integrate with the API Store nicely since API artifacts are anyway in the registry as well. So linking up API permission rules with forum topics can be done seamlessly. Having said that, this forum is not tightly coupled with the Registry. It is exposed to the FE (UI) through a clearly defined API (interface). The first cut implementation is a registry based implementation. But anyone could implement this interface for anything else. Thanks, NuwanD. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Ruchira Wageesha ruch...@wso2.com wrote: Hi Senaka, Yes, UES team is supposed to do this and have already completed most of the base of it using cassandra. But, depending a AM's commitment, they wanted to implement something quickly, AFAIK, probably within 2 weeks. You can find the thread on that at @architecture [Architecture] Developer Forum for the API Store [1] [1] https://mail-archive.com/architecture%40wso2.org/msg03817.html On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Senaka Fernando sen...@wso2.com wrote: Hi all, I think we are heading in the wrong direction here. IIRC, we discussed to implement a social component. The UES guys are or will be working on this. The idea was to keep this outside of the registry. Can you'll chat with Ruchira as well and try to understand how all of this fits together. The AM and the ES and the rest of the social aspects have to line up or these will increasingly become incompatible. And, WRT Uvindra's case. That solution was a highly subjective one Uvindra. As Ajith says, we cannot make it a generic solution and be done with that. This has to be solved properly. But, for the scenario of a forum I don't think any of that was discussed here is going to work as I have explained above. Thanks, Senaka. On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote: Hi Nuwan, On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote: On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote: Hi Uvindra, On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha uvin...@wso2.com wrote: This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with Ajith just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned we ran into the same limitation when developing the development governance solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could not accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after discussing with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the solution accordingly. So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :) Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping. Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field. Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than 1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and have to resort to other complicated measures. So I suggest that we make it a point to fix this urgently when appropriate. Kernel 4.3.0 or C5 at least. Sooner the better :) As I mentioned early, property is the storage model we used for RXT. Storing the whole content as XML (BLOB) and parsing XML each time is NOT a solution at all. Registry schema is a generic one to platform and it can't be change the with the requirement of all new features. So, what we can do is use the
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
@Senaka and Ajith Yes the current solution done for dev governance has an upper limit of 5000 characters, but keep in mind that we are not using the registry directly like APIM, but are using ES which is using the registry underneath. So we cant do any of the work arounds that have been suggested AFAIU. So anyone using ES will also be affected by this rxt limitation. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote: Hi, I have got around the problem by storing the content as a separate registry resource. The only drawback in this case is that we'll have to write a separate indexer for searching by content. The forum topic and other metadata still reside within the artifact and therefore indexing/searching is not a problem. So basically the problem is solved. The problem I wanted to highlight. - As per my understanding the 'text' field and 'text-area' field in artifacts have no differences. They both can store only a limited number of characters. Am I right? If so, for someone using the registry to store artifacts it looks misleading and makes them think that limiting a text-area content length is wrong. I understand that this behavior is by design and it is overly complicated to change this :). Why we used the registry? -- The registry already has in built capabilities for searching/indexing, sorting, pagination, categorization through tags, artifact permissions, etc. We also had the need of a permission model (coupled with APIs) for the forum. And on top of that we needed to get this forum implemented pretty fast (~2 weeks). When the registry already has all these capabilities, why would we reinvent everything on top of something else? Besides, having it in the registry makes it integrate with the API Store nicely since API artifacts are anyway in the registry as well. So linking up API permission rules with forum topics can be done seamlessly. Having said that, this forum is not tightly coupled with the Registry. It is exposed to the FE (UI) through a clearly defined API (interface). The first cut implementation is a registry based implementation. But anyone could implement this interface for anything else. Thanks, NuwanD. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Ruchira Wageesha ruch...@wso2.comwrote: Hi Senaka, Yes, UES team is supposed to do this and have already completed most of the base of it using cassandra. But, depending a AM's commitment, they wanted to implement something quickly, AFAIK, probably within 2 weeks. You can find the thread on that at @architecture [Architecture] Developer Forum for the API Store [1] [1] https://mail-archive.com/architecture%40wso2.org/msg03817.html On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Senaka Fernando sen...@wso2.comwrote: Hi all, I think we are heading in the wrong direction here. IIRC, we discussed to implement a social component. The UES guys are or will be working on this. The idea was to keep this outside of the registry. Can you'll chat with Ruchira as well and try to understand how all of this fits together. The AM and the ES and the rest of the social aspects have to line up or these will increasingly become incompatible. And, WRT Uvindra's case. That solution was a highly subjective one Uvindra. As Ajith says, we cannot make it a generic solution and be done with that. This has to be solved properly. But, for the scenario of a forum I don't think any of that was discussed here is going to work as I have explained above. Thanks, Senaka. On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote: Hi Nuwan, On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote: On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote: Hi Uvindra, On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha uvin...@wso2.com wrote: This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with Ajith just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned we ran into the same limitation when developing the development governance solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could not accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after discussing with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the solution accordingly. So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :) Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping. Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field. Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than 1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and have to resort to
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
Why are we using registry for this at the first place ?
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Uvindra,
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha
uvin...@wso2.comwrote:
This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with Ajith
just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned we ran
into the same limitation when developing the development governance
solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could not
accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after discussing
with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of
REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the
solution accordingly.
So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :)
Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping.
Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt
right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field.
Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the
rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than
1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and
have to resort to other complicated measures.
So I suggest that we make it a point to fix this urgently when
appropriate. Kernel 4.3.0 or C5 at least. Sooner the better :)
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a
good idea?
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the
data model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field is
a special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this use
case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get
the following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the
field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES
(?, ?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field
in the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the
database for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically
its
not possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000
characters
long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I
see is to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do
we
need to have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we can
get rid of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
--
Regards,
Uvindra
Mobile: 33962
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
--
Suresh Attanayake
Senior Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com/
Blog : http://sureshatt.blogspot.com/
Web : http://www.ssoarcade.com/
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/IdentityWorld
Twitter : https://twitter.com/sureshatt
LinkedIn : http://lk.linkedin.com/in/sureshatt
Mobile : +94755012060
Mobile : +016166171172
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
Hi Nuwan,
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Uvindra,
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha
uvin...@wso2.comwrote:
This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with Ajith
just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned we ran
into the same limitation when developing the development governance
solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could not
accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after discussing
with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of
REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the
solution accordingly.
So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :)
Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping.
Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt
right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field.
Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the
rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than
1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and
have to resort to other complicated measures.
So I suggest that we make it a point to fix this urgently when
appropriate. Kernel 4.3.0 or C5 at least. Sooner the better :)
As I mentioned early, property is the storage model we used for RXT.
Storing the whole content as XML (BLOB) and parsing XML each time is NOT
a solution at all.
Registry schema is a generic one to platform and it can't be change the
with the requirement of all new features. So, what we can do is use the
existing feature combinations to support the new requirement.
If you want to store the large content/doc with artifact, then store that
content as separate resource and build the dependency/association with the
artifacts.
WDYT ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a
good idea?
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the
data model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field is
a special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this use
case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get
the following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the
field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES
(?, ?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field
in the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the
database for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically
its
not possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000
characters
long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I
see is to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do
we
need to have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we can
get rid of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
--
Regards,
Uvindra
Mobile: 33962
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
___
Dev
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
Hi all,
I think we are heading in the wrong direction here. IIRC, we discussed to
implement a social component. The UES guys are or will be working on this.
The idea was to keep this outside of the registry. Can you'll chat with
Ruchira as well and try to understand how all of this fits together. The AM
and the ES and the rest of the social aspects have to line up or these will
increasingly become incompatible.
And, WRT Uvindra's case. That solution was a highly subjective one Uvindra.
As Ajith says, we cannot make it a generic solution and be done with that.
This has to be solved properly. But, for the scenario of a forum I don't
think any of that was discussed here is going to work as I have explained
above.
Thanks,
Senaka.
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Nuwan,
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Uvindra,
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha uvin...@wso2.com
wrote:
This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with Ajith
just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned we ran
into the same limitation when developing the development governance
solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could not
accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after discussing
with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of
REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the
solution accordingly.
So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :)
Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping.
Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt
right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field.
Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the
rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than
1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and
have to resort to other complicated measures.
So I suggest that we make it a point to fix this urgently when
appropriate. Kernel 4.3.0 or C5 at least. Sooner the better :)
As I mentioned early, property is the storage model we used for RXT.
Storing the whole content as XML (BLOB) and parsing XML each time is NOT
a solution at all.
Registry schema is a generic one to platform and it can't be change the
with the requirement of all new features. So, what we can do is use the
existing feature combinations to support the new requirement.
If you want to store the large content/doc with artifact, then store that
content as separate resource and build the dependency/association with the
artifacts.
WDYT ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So
limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a
good idea?
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the
data model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field
is
a special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this
use case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get
the following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the
field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES
(?, ?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field
in the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the
database for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically
its
not possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000
characters
long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I
see is to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do
we
need to have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we
can
get rid of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc.
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
Hi Senaka,
Yes, UES team is supposed to do this and have already completed most of the
base of it using cassandra. But, depending a AM's commitment, they wanted
to implement something quickly, AFAIK, probably within 2 weeks.
You can find the thread on that at @architecture [Architecture] Developer
Forum for the API Store [1]
[1] https://mail-archive.com/architecture%40wso2.org/msg03817.html
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Senaka Fernando sen...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi all,
I think we are heading in the wrong direction here. IIRC, we discussed to
implement a social component. The UES guys are or will be working on this.
The idea was to keep this outside of the registry. Can you'll chat with
Ruchira as well and try to understand how all of this fits together. The AM
and the ES and the rest of the social aspects have to line up or these will
increasingly become incompatible.
And, WRT Uvindra's case. That solution was a highly subjective one
Uvindra. As Ajith says, we cannot make it a generic solution and be done
with that. This has to be solved properly. But, for the scenario of a forum
I don't think any of that was discussed here is going to work as I have
explained above.
Thanks,
Senaka.
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Nuwan,
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote:
Hi Uvindra,
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha
uvin...@wso2.com wrote:
This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with
Ajith just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned
we ran into the same limitation when developing the development governance
solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could
not
accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after
discussing
with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of
REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the
solution accordingly.
So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :)
Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping.
Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt
right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field.
Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the
rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than
1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and
have to resort to other complicated measures.
So I suggest that we make it a point to fix this urgently when
appropriate. Kernel 4.3.0 or C5 at least. Sooner the better :)
As I mentioned early, property is the storage model we used for RXT.
Storing the whole content as XML (BLOB) and parsing XML each time is NOT
a solution at all.
Registry schema is a generic one to platform and it can't be change the
with the requirement of all new features. So, what we can do is use the
existing feature combinations to support the new requirement.
If you want to store the large content/doc with artifact, then store that
content as separate resource and build the dependency/association with the
artifacts.
WDYT ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an
artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So
limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a
good idea?
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.comwrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the
data model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field
is
a special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this
use case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get
the following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the
field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID)
VALUES (?, ?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field
in the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the
database for
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the data
model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field is a
special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this use
case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get the
following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES (?,
?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field in the
rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the database for
the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically its not possible
to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000 characters long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I see is
to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do we need to
have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we can get rid
of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a good
idea?
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the data
model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field is a
special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this use
case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get the
following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES (?,
?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field in
the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the database
for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically its not
possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000 characters long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I see is
to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do we need to
have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we can get rid
of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with Ajith
just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned we ran
into the same limitation when developing the development governance
solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could not
accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after discussing
with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of
REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the
solution accordingly.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a good
idea?
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the data
model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field is a
special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this use
case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get the
following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES (?,
?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field in
the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the database
for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically its not
possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000 characters long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I see
is to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do we need
to have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we can get
rid of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
--
Regards,
Uvindra
Mobile: 33962
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a good
idea?.
Changing the default script to support this case is not a good option,
because all the other scenarios works fine with default length.
AFAIK, if we increase the length of REG_VALUE , that can be affect to
increase the db space as well ?.
Can't we store in multiple (unbounded) text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the data
model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field is a
special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this use
case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get the
following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES (?,
?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field in
the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the database
for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically its not
possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000 characters long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I see
is to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do we need
to have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we can get
rid of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] Value too long for REG_VALUE issue in Registry
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Uvindra,
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha
uvin...@wso2.comwrote:
This limitation was highlighted during the discussion we had with Ajith
just before work on the API Store forum was started. As I mentioned we ran
into the same limitation when developing the development governance
solution. The text area that was to store custom javascript rules could not
accommodate anything exceeding 1000 characters. In the end after discussing
with Senaka we solved the problem by increasing the column size of
REG_VALUE to 5000 and changing the DB scripts that were shipped with the
solution accordingly.
So, what happen when the length is 5001 ? :)
Yes, I think we should someday fix this rxt field to property mapping.
Otherwise there's no point in having a field called 'text-area' in the rxt
right? Its capabilities become limited to same as the 'text' field.
Besides, from a user POV, there's no point in creating a property in the
rxt for each field. And when you comes across the need to store more than
1000 characters in an artifact, you're totally blocked from doing so and
have to resort to other complicated measures.
So I suggest that we make it a point to fix this urgently when appropriate.
Kernel 4.3.0 or C5 at least. Sooner the better :)
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Ajith,
We're developing a forum for the API Store using the registry as the
storage medium. Each topic/reply is stored in the registry as an artifact.
Topics/Replies have a rich text editor which supports code blocks, etc.
This text-area has been mapped to a text-area field in the rxt. So limiting
the characters to 1000 is not very feasible in this scenario.
Are you saying that increasing the column size of REG_VALUE is not a
good idea?
Thanks,
NuwanD.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Ajith Vitharana aji...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi Nuwan,
We store the each filed as properties of the artifacts, that is the
data model used. Anyway, having the 1000 characters for the given field is
a special case.
So, it is not better to increase the default schema to handle this use
case.
Can't we limit the characters length for that text-area ?
Thanks.
Ajith.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Nuwan Dias nuw...@wso2.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an rxt on which I am using a text-area field. However I get the
following error if I am to put more that 1000 characters in the field.
org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Value too long for column REG_VALUE
VARCHAR(1000): STRINGDECODE('tabletbodytrtd
class=\votecell\div class=\vote\\nspan
class=\vote-count-post \2/span\n... (1107); SQL statement:
INSERT INTO REG_PROPERTY (REG_NAME, REG_VALUE, REG_TENANT_ID) VALUES
(?, ?, ?) [90005-140]
The reason for the above problem is due to the fact that each field in
the rxt is also saved as a rxt property. The column length in the database
for the property value is 1000 characters. Therefore basically its not
possible to have a field in the rxt which is more than 1000 characters
long.
I see this as a serious limitation. The only possible workaround I see
is to increase the column size. Any other solutions to this? Why do we
need
to have a property corresponding to each field in the rxt? If we can get
rid of that, then we're good IMO.
Thanks,
NuwanD.
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
--
Regards,
Uvindra
Mobile: 33962
--
Ajith Vitharana.
WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org
Email : aji...@wso2.com
Mobile : +94772217350
--
Nuwan Dias
Associate Tech Lead - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : nuw...@wso2.com
Phone : +94 777 775 729
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
