Re: [Gnumed-devel] examining current schemas

[Karsten Hilbert]

> shows many tables, but there is no indication of varying databases to 
> which each belongs, are they all in a single database "gnumed" and how
Yes. They are "logically grouped" by "service" only currently.
Reason being that a) I was wary ;-) yet to make schema support in
the backend mandatory (we might consider doing so) and b)
before the PUPIC issue isn't solved I won't be moving the
services into separate databases as much as I dislike not
doing so (except for non-patient-specific ones, say,
reference).

> do these tables relate to the .sql files in the /server/ directory? 
Yes, they are all created by running the files in that directory.
The files show the logical grouping much better.

> Maybe the documentation is generated from a "monolithic" gnumed which 
> is in fact out of date and no longer represented (yet convenient) and 
> the sql files reflect a newer, non-monolithic schema? 
No. It'll always be possible to just have all tables in one
big database. Being able to spread them out doesn't mean one
has to.

> For example I was trying to figure out into which database/tables the 
> doctor-administrators would be registering the doctors, staff and 
> roles. I found the following: 
> http://hherb.com/gnumed/schema/#public.table.staff 
and staff_role and v_staff

> but am having trouble figuring out how this table related to the 
> /server/sql files. 
A person is a person is a person. The staff tables are in
gmDemographics.sql. The views are in
gmDemographics-Person-Views.sql.

> - I do not see among the web schema tables a field is_doctor,
A person becomes a doctor virtue of being linked from the
staff table where fk_staff_role points to a doctor entry in
staff_role.

> or a list 
> of values that would include doctor, where is this provided. 
gmClinicalData.sql. It doesn't belong there, true.

> - Also I did not see anywhere that the group gm-staff_medical is given 
> permissions even to places where they should for example the street 
> table, would this be a detail intended for later implementation?
Yes. Or else one could just assign the apparently needed
rights in the corresponding views file.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346