Mailing-List: contact dev-help@atlas.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@atlas.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="===============6215767972638050291=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Review Request 62244: ATLAS2058 Add description to attributedefs
 and relationship enddefs
From: Madhan Neethiraj <madhan@apache.org>
To: Madhan Neethiraj <madhan@apache.org>
Cc: atlas <dev@atlas.incubator.apache.org>, David Radley <davidrad@apache.org>,
 Sarath Subramanian <sarath@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0000
Message-ID: <20170913091748.50237.88286@reviews-vm2.apache.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Sender: Madhan Neethiraj <noreply@reviews.apache.org>
References: <20170912181528.46133.97426@reviews-vm2.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170912181528.46133.97426@reviews-vm2.apache.org>
Reply-To: Madhan Neethiraj <madhan@apache.org>
archived-at: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 09:17:56 -0000

--===============6215767972638050291==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> On Sept. 12, 2017, 6:15 p.m., Sarath Subramanian wrote:
> > intg/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/model/typedef/AtlasStructDef.java
> > Lines 275 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/62244/diff/1/?file=1820214#file1820214line275>
> >
> >     can we include descriptions for existing attributes and relationshipEndDefs for out of the box models as part of this JIRA?
> 
> David Radley wrote:
>     I think it is better to separate the putting values into the models into separate Jiras. We can then use those Jiras to review the description content rather than the mechanism to introduce description.
> 
> Madhan Neethiraj wrote:
>     I agree. However, I would suggest adding 'Map<String, String> aliases' field to struct-def and attribute-def - to enable alternate names for these to be stored along with entity-def, classification-def and attribute-def. This should be a trivial update and can be taken up along with addition of 'description' field.
> 
> David Radley wrote:
>     I am unsure what the keys and values might be for the aliases map you are proposing. Are you thinking that the aliases would be instance aliases or type aliases? 
>     
>     We are thinking of adding external type identifications (ExternalTypeIdDefs) as a new array associated with attributes, structures (and the otehr defs). We are thinking the elements would be specified in the typeDefs in the form:
>     
>     ExternalTypeIdDefs [
>     {   "scheme":"O-DEF",
>         "value":"123-456",
>         "description":"Relational Database",
>         "ResponsibleOrg":"Open Group",
>         "ReferenceDocumentationURL":"http://xxx.yyy.zzz"
>     },
>     {
>     ...
>     }
>     ]
>     
>     Scheme and value would be manditory.
>     
>     One way to handle type aliases would be using the above mechanism: 
>     {   "scheme":"alias",
>         "value":"RDB",
>         "description":"short hand relational database key for consumer A",
>         "ResponsibleOrg":"Consumer A organisation",
>         "ReferenceDocumentationURL":"http://aaa.bbb.bbb"
>     },
>     
>     or
>     
>     {   "scheme":"alias",
>         "value":"RDB"
>     },
>     
>     
>     This would allow these external type identifier metadata values to be visible in the json models.
>     
>     I was thinking of doing this piece separately in another Jira. The addition of the code as-is in the Jira will in enable me to add desciptions to the attributes / relationship ends in the new models. For the existing Hadoop models - it might be worth having someone more expert in Hadoop filling in those descriptions.
> 
> David Radley wrote:
>     One other thought - if the aliases map are for instances - I wonder if they could be indexed. I assume they could be specified in a search query.

We discussed about an entity-type or an attribute in Atlas being referred with a different name in other meta-data standards. The 'alias' field I suggested above is to capture these names along with entity-def/attribute-def in Atlas. I assume it will be enough to capure only the name used in other standards; if more richer information is available, how likely it is to be able to capture all the details available in various standards? To keep it simple, we can start with only capturing the names used in other meta-data standards.


- Madhan


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/62244/#review185223
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Sept. 12, 2017, 5:13 p.m., David Radley wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/62244/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 12, 2017, 5:13 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for atlas and Madhan Neethiraj.
> 
> 
> Repository: atlas
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> ATLAS2058 Add description to attributedefs and relationship enddefs
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   intg/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/model/typedef/AtlasRelationshipEndDef.java 01e5ce738e8a5310cee928560364d4a38f5c6e18 
>   intg/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/model/typedef/AtlasStructDef.java 3a5c43ac7e6d0a7f683c24d13d6c841de4d66a14 
>   repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/store/graph/v1/AtlasStructDefStoreV1.java c3c42be86d8c9fd282fdc1428c8fd78e338a3cfb 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62244/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Create an entity attribute, relationship attribute and a relationship end with a description and then issue getTypeDefs to check they are there.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> David Radley
> 
>


--===============6215767972638050291==--