Refactoring ODM2RestfulWebservices
Closed this issue · 15 comments
Overview
I have explored @emiliom Demo for his Marchantaria database and view the results of each REST endpoint on AWS. Additionally, #8 shows my attempt to integrate the REST API into another Database, in this case @miguelcleon LCZO Database.
I think that the current code is doing what it supposed to and doing it pretty well, though it's not fully utilizing the ODM2PythonAPI. It is a similar case to WOFpy, ODM2RestfulWebServices is only using the models from ODM2PythonAPI.
Django ORM vs SQLAlchemy ORM
After researching and learning about Django ORM vs SQLAlchemy ORM, I found this article that summarize the differences. I think that sticking with using the power of SQLAlchemy ORM through ODM2PythonAPI is a good way to go for Read Only REST API, since we will be able to create a very complex queries with SQLAlchemy ORM compared to Django ORM. Additionally, SQLAlchemy is supported by many databases including MSSQL.
Code structure
Going through the code, I think that restructuring is needed. For example, many of the views are long and lots of the functions seems to be serializers rather than views. For example odm2rest/result_views.py#L776
Package updates
Obviously, a huge update is needed for the dependencies for ODM2RestfulWebServices. But, a lot of work will be needed to updates the swagger view for django rest framework. Here are a list of resources that will help start this effort.
- http://www.django-rest-framework.org/api-guide/schemas/#representing-schemas-internally
- http://marcgibbons.github.io/django-rest-swagger/
Additionally, more integration with ODM2PythonAPI could be done to perform some queries that are already available.
Thanks for the assessment and summary, @lsetiawan!
One question:
I think that sticking with using the power of SQLAlchemy ORM through ODM2PythonAPI is a good way to go for Read Only REST API
While we don't have near-term plans to address data writing/push/updating via the REST API, it'd be useful to keep that future possibility in mind as we make architecture decisions. Can you say something about how SQLAlchemy ORM and Django ORM compare for that capability?
@lsetiawan, that's a really great start. I'll add to my TO DO's to refine your text a bit to improve its clarity, based on what you've told me.
@lsetiawan, that's a really great start. I'll add to my TO DO's to refine your text a bit to improve its clarity, based on what you've told me.
Great thanks!
While we don't have near-term plans to address data writing/push/updating via the REST API, it'd be useful to keep that future possibility in mind as we make architecture decisions. Can you say something about how SQLAlchemy ORM and Django ORM compare for that capability?
I will look into this. Not sure how they compare regarding writing/push/update via REST API.
I have made a proof of concept using Django, DjangoRestFramework, ODM2PythonAPI. See branch https://github.com/ODM2/ODM2RESTfulWebServices/tree/odm2rest_1_0/odm2rest.
Very cool, thanks! Looking forward to seeing it in more detail tomorrow.
Let me know how this goes guys. We are sort of holding until we have a better idea of how to move forward. I would like to get Eli contributing to whichever direction we settle on.
I'll follow up very soon, @horsburgh. In the meantime, please reply on this thread to give us Eli's github handle and email address (you can send me his email address via email if you prefer)
Hey @emillion. This is eli, email is elijahwalkerwest@gmail.com
Even cooler proof of concept. I was able to figure out swagger also! It was actually super easy once it clicked in my head.
@lsetiawan: awesome! Looking forward to discussing it in a couple of hours.
@Elijahwalkerwest: Thanks for following up. I'll be reaching out later today.
@emiliom I have made a branch odm2rest_legacy which has the current master branch. I was thinking maybe it's time to make the new master to the current development? what do you think? Thanks!
I was thinking maybe it's time to make the new master to the current development? what do you think?
I agree. Go for it. But please add a brief statement about this at the start of the README doc, with a link to the legacy branch.
Code has been refractored as of Oct 23. Latest development code is now in master branch. The old API code is mentioned on the README doc with a link.
FYI, I just edited the README file (directly on the repo, no PR, sorry), mainly to create a new section addressing the "Legacy prototype version" more clearly and in a bit more details.
Sounds good. Thanks for letting me know. I like the more detailed version.