Skip to main content

Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.

Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "COSMOS Design 214158"

(Design)
Line 56: Line 56:
  
 
=Design=
 
=Design=
The following are some design issues:
+
There are two types of customization that is possible:
 
+
*application driven
# A graph response is a complex structure.  How can a customized view be associated with a graph response or a fragment of a graph response?
+
*data driven customization
# Should the ui customization be data driven or application driven
+
 
+
Consider we have a library of widgets that are able to visualize certain asset information.  These widgets expect a specific data model.  For example, I may have a table widget that show a list of applications installed on a particular machine.  This table widget expects a specific JSON data structure to visualize the list of application.  Now consider a MDR that contains that application and machine information.  A query would be sent to this MDR to get that specific information and a CMDBf graph response would be returned.  The graph response would embed the information in a <record> element.  At this point when the graph response is recieved by the client.  The client can not render the graph response as a table since it does not understand the graph response.  An additional step is needed to normalize the graph response to the JSON data structure that the tree expects. 
+
  
 
===Application-Driven Customization===
 
===Application-Driven Customization===
Line 69: Line 66:
 
In this case, a registry service is need to associate a view with a graph query instead of the graph response.  Note that the view expects a certain graph response format that is dictated by the graph query.
 
In this case, a registry service is need to associate a view with a graph query instead of the graph response.  Note that the view expects a certain graph response format that is dictated by the graph query.
  
The above mechanism requires a datafeed that accepts a graph query id and returns a graph response that tags the response with the graph query id.  The graph query id will be used to lookup the registered view assoicated with the graph query.
+
The above mechanism requires a datafeed that accepts a graph query id and returns a graph response that tags the response with the graph query id.  The graph query id will be used to lookup the registered view assoicated with the graph query.
 +
 
 +
Application-Driven Customization is already provided by the COSMOS UI framework
  
 
===Data-Driven Customization===
 
===Data-Driven Customization===
In this case the data recieved from a CMDBf graph response will determine the view to render the graph response.  Does data driven customization useful?  Need to understand uses cases that would make this useful.
+
Consider we have a library of widgets that are able to visualize certain asset information.  These widgets expect a specific data model.  For example, I may have a table widget that show a list of applications installed on a particular machine.  This table widget expects a specific JSON data structure to visualize the list of application.  Now consider a MDR that contains that application and machine information.  A query would be sent to this MDR to get that specific information and a CMDBf graph response would be returned.  The graph response would embed the information in a <record> element.  At this point when the graph response is recieved by the client.  The client can not render the graph response as a table since it does not understand the graph response structureAn additional step is needed to normalize the graph response to the JSON data structure that the tree expects.
  
 
In this case, a registry service is need to associate a view with a graph response instead of a graph query
 
In this case, a registry service is need to associate a view with a graph response instead of a graph query
  
 
[[Category:COSMOS_Bugzilla_Designs]]
 
[[Category:COSMOS_Bugzilla_Designs]]

Revision as of 15:02, 8 January 2008

Back to Data Reporting Design

Change History

Name: Date: Revised Sections:
Sheldon Lee-Loy 01/08/2008
  • Initial version

Workload Estimation

Rough workload estimate in person weeks
Process Sizing Names of people doing the work
Design 0.2 Sheldon Lee-Loy
Code
Test
Documentation
Build and infrastructure
Code review, etc.*
TOTAL

'* - includes other committer work (e.g. check-in, contribution tracking)

Requirement

A programming strategy is needed to associate a customized view with a particular graph response. A graph response is a generic structure that represents data from a data manager. Customized data is wrapped inside a graph response that an application may want to provide customized view to visualize the data.

Design

There are two types of customization that is possible:

  • application driven
  • data driven customization

Application-Driven Customization

Tradionally, the application developer determines the view that will render the data. For example, if a cmdbf query is constructured to return statistical data for a particular web server the application developer may decide to render the statistical data as a line chart. In other cases, the application developer may want to render the data as a table depending on the application context.

In this case, a registry service is need to associate a view with a graph query instead of the graph response. Note that the view expects a certain graph response format that is dictated by the graph query.

The above mechanism requires a datafeed that accepts a graph query id and returns a graph response that tags the response with the graph query id. The graph query id will be used to lookup the registered view assoicated with the graph query.

Application-Driven Customization is already provided by the COSMOS UI framework

Data-Driven Customization

Consider we have a library of widgets that are able to visualize certain asset information. These widgets expect a specific data model. For example, I may have a table widget that show a list of applications installed on a particular machine. This table widget expects a specific JSON data structure to visualize the list of application. Now consider a MDR that contains that application and machine information. A query would be sent to this MDR to get that specific information and a CMDBf graph response would be returned. The graph response would embed the information in a <record> element. At this point when the graph response is recieved by the client. The client can not render the graph response as a table since it does not understand the graph response structure. An additional step is needed to normalize the graph response to the JSON data structure that the tree expects.

In this case, a registry service is need to associate a view with a graph response instead of a graph query

Back to the top