Merge lp://staging/~free.ekanayaka/storm/schema-uri-in-testresource into lp://staging/storm

[1]
+ different user with greater priviliges than the user running the tests. Note

Typo: privileges.

+1!

Thanks Thomas!

[1]

Fixed.

This looks reasonable to me. Since I'm no Storm expert, I do have some questions, though?

[1]

+ @param databases: A C{list} of C{dict}s holding the following keys:
+ - 'name', the name of the store to be registered.
+ - 'uri', the database URI to use to create the store.
+ - 'schema', the L{Schema} for the tables in the store.
+ - 'schema-uri', optionally an alternate URI to use for applying the
+ schema, if not given it defaults to 'uri'.

Maybe it would be worth adding a note about the old deprecated format as well? It will save someone some confusion, when he see that the code he has doesn't match the documentation.

[2]
+ schema_zstorm = ZStorm()
+ databases = self._databases
+
+ # Adapt the old databases format to the new one, for backward
+ # compatibility. This should be eventually dropped.
+ if isinstance(databases, dict):
+ databases = [{"name": name, "uri": uri, "schema": schema}
+ for name, (uri, schema) in databases.iteritems()]
+
+ for database in databases:
+ name = database["name"]
+ uri = database["uri"]
+ schema = database["schema"]
+ schema_uri = database.get("schema-uri", uri)
+ self._schemas[name] = schema
                 zstorm.set_default_uri(name, uri)
+ schema_zstorm.set_default_uri(name, schema_uri)
                 store = zstorm.get(name)
                 self._set_commit_proxy(store)
- schema.upgrade(store)
+ schema_store = schema_zstorm.get(name)
+ schema.upgrade(schema_store)

I guess we will always have two connections to the database, even if the same user is to be used? Will this have the risk of causing any trouble for someone? Would it make sense to set schema_zstorm = zstorm, if no schema_uri is provided, to have it work exactly as before, if no specific user is specified.

[3]

Specifying a schema URI requires you to repeat certain things from the normal URI, like database type, port number, host name, database name. Would it be possible to come up with an API where you specify only a username and password?

< free> BjornT: so about point [1], maybe it'd create more confusion than.
        clarity, because this feature was added just in the last Storm.
        release, and I'd be surprised if there's any code beside.
        clouddeck that is using it
< BjornT> free: sure, sounds reasonable
< free> BjornT: about point [2], yeah, I've thought about that as well,.
        but probably it's good to keep the connections separate in all.
        cases, for separating concerns, in case some test really messes.
        up the stores
< free> BjornT: [3] is a bit unfortunate indeed, but actually it would be.
        possible to pass a storm.uri.URI() object, the thing is that the.
        latter is not really part of the public API, I guess
< free> BjornT: and requires a string in the __init__, I guess it could.
        be changed to accomodate similar use cases
< free> BjornT: and the code in the branch would work without changes
< free> BjornT: passing only the user and the password might not be.
        enough, because you might want to pass specific options, etc. so.
        an uri string or an URI object is the most generic way to do that
< BjornT> free: ok. none of these issues were blocking. i mainly wanted.
          to make sure you thought about these things.

As a point of reference, we're using ZStormResourceManager in
Fluidinfo. Anyway, this change won't cause problems for us, thanks
for pushing it forward! :)

@Jamu: Doh :)

As a minor nit, it feels like it's time to introduce a richer object to hold that information. There's no reason to carry around that kind of untyped blob and have to parse it out when reading.

Note that *everything* can be represented as a key and a value in a dict in a list in a ... still, we use types and instances with nicely named methods, etc.

Hi Gustavo,

so you mean a parameter object? like:

class ZStormResourceManagerDatabase(object):

    def __init__(self, name, uri, schema, schema_uri=None):
        ...

and then

   manager = ZStormResourceManager([ZStormResourceManagerDatabase(...),
                                    ZStormResourceManagerDatabase(...),
                                    ...])

Alternatively instead of passing this information in the constructor we could have a configuration method like:

class ZStormResourceManager(object):

    def add_database(self, name, uri, schema, schema_uri=None):
        ...