[Opensim-dev] Please do not revert fixes without careful comtemplation

[Mike Mazur]

Hi,

On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Tommi Laukkanen
<tommi.s.e.laukkanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> I was talking with mikkopa and he suggested we should create two tables to
> cover AssetBase to solve this issue properly. Namely AssetMetadata for
> metadata information and AssetData for blobs to avoid situation where we end
> up accessing also the blob data just to read metadata.

I was hoping not to have to do that.

It should be straightforward to support the current
AssetBase/AssetMetadata composition in the existing OpenSim data
layers, but as sdague warned me earlier, by mapping multiple classes
to one table I was entering a world of pain. Seems that's exactly
what's happening with NHibernate.

The reason I introduced the AssetMetadata class is to supply metadata
information only for some requests that Cable Beach, the new asset
server, supports. Now I realize that this was probably a premature
optimization.

Instead of modifying the DB schema, we could have AssetBase inherit
from AssetMetadata, as I outlined before[1]. Alternatively, we could
get rid of AssetMetadata altogether and store everything in AssetBase
as before, splitting out the metadata sometime in the future when a
use case warrants it.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Mike


[1] https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-dev/2009-February/004918.html