Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Spike: Strong relations in Cloudant & CouchDB #2343

Closed
5 tasks
bajtos opened this issue Feb 5, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed
5 tasks

Spike: Strong relations in Cloudant & CouchDB #2343

bajtos opened this issue Feb 5, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
Relations Model relations (has many, etc.) spike stale

Comments

@bajtos
Copy link
Member

bajtos commented Feb 5, 2019

Research what tools are offered by CouchDB and Cloudant for ensuring referential integrity.

Come up with a proposal on how LoopBack applications should implement the following relations:

  • 1-N (hasMany)
  • N-1 (belongsTo)
  • 1-1 (hasOne/belongsTo)

For example, we can recommend referencesMany or embedsMany, but also find out that a completely new relation type is needed.

See #2127 for wider context and #1718 (comment) for explanation of strong vs. weak relations.

Acceptance criteria

  • A document explaining what mechanisms are offered by CouchDB & Cloudant to preserve consistency (integrity). (Start by studying Cloudant documentation and guides to build this understanding yourself.)
  • A proposal: what LoopBack relations we want to recommend for CouchDB and Cloudant
  • Arguments showing why we recommended the chosen relations, why other relations won't work with Cloudant/CouchDB. (This will build on top of the document from the first task.)
  • User stories to implement the missing relation types identified as needed. If needed, create spike stories to figure out implementation details of some/all of these relation types.
  • A pull request to update the overview created in Docs: what relation types will work well with my database? #2341 with our recommendation (item 2) and our arguments (item 3). If we end up recommending relation types that are not implemented yet, then the overview should be updated with links to GH stories tracking these missing features.
@jannyHou
Copy link
Contributor

Timebox to 5 days

@bajtos bajtos added 2019Q3 and removed 2019Q2 labels Apr 9, 2019
@dhmlau dhmlau added 2019Q4 and removed 2019Q3 labels Aug 20, 2019
@dhmlau dhmlau added p3 and removed 2019Q4 labels Sep 24, 2019
@dhmlau dhmlau removed the 2020Q1 label Nov 14, 2019
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Dec 25, 2020

This issue has been marked stale because it has not seen activity within six months. If you believe this to be in error, please contact one of the code owners, listed in the CODEOWNERS file at the top-level of this repository. This issue will be closed within 30 days of being stale.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Dec 25, 2020
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jul 14, 2021

This issue has been closed due to continued inactivity. Thank you for your understanding. If you believe this to be in error, please contact one of the code owners, listed in the CODEOWNERS file at the top-level of this repository.

@stale stale bot closed this as completed Jul 14, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Relations Model relations (has many, etc.) spike stale
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants