You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I want to star/bookmark a resource to be revisited again later and able to fetch all of my starred resources.
Describe the solution you'd like
We need a new table in DB with this schema
starring
type
Sample Value
id (PK)
SERIAL
1
user_id (FK)
UUID
11234-4214214
asset_id (FK)
UUID
11234-4214214
created_at
TIMESTAMP
12345667
updated_at
TIMESTAMP
12345667
We need a new starring repository layer
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Considering we already have assets table in postgres, do you guys think it will be better to remove asset_urn and asset_type and replace them with asset_id instead? @StewartJingga@ravisuhag
assets_urn would still need to be there, right? That is the only way meteor identifies the assets, right. Without this, It won't know about Columbus asset_id to update assets.
We still use asset_urn and asset_type on API params.
But inside we can resolve the asset_id via asset_table.
My concern is
Unique information of an asset in stars table would be a tuple (asset_urn, asset_type). Because asset_urn (at least for now) is not globally unique.
If we just use asset_id in stars table, we only have a single unique information about an assets.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I want to star/bookmark a resource to be revisited again later and able to fetch all of my starred resources.
Describe the solution you'd like
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: