[Geoserver-devel] Resolving inconsistency between user experience of stores, and its actual impementation

Hi all,
in GeoServer we have had for ages an inconsistency between what we present in the UI, store wise, and the actual behavior for creating stores, that I’d like to make consistent.

UI wise, one goes to create a store, and chooses a specific store type, getting its associated form. When enumerating the available stores, one also has certainty about the store type, and it’s consistent with what was chosen in the GUI:

image.png

So far so good, but when the actual creation happens, things can take another route.
Let me give you some code pointers.

Finding the Store type
The above page populates the “type” column calling ResourcePool.getDataStoreFactory(storeInfo)
The method first checks the StoreInfo.getType (e.g., GeoPackage), and looks it up based solely on that, matching with the display name of factories. If that does not work, then it falls back on using the connection parameters.

This fall back is useful and important, it allows to plugin an alternative factory that can handle the same parameters, allows for code upgrades (e.g, old jdbc stores vs ng ones, as it happened a few years ago).

Creating the store
ResourcePool.createDataAccess is responsible for creating the store. It first looks up a factory by name, does some checks on it (and actually throws an exception if the factory is not found) and then… throws everything away and creates the store by just using the parameters!

The above situation is normally consistent because we try to have stores with parameters that are different enough, that two store won’t collide… but it’s pretty fragile, and indeed it broke, because the FlatGeoBuf store, does not have one of those discriminator fake parameters…
and the result is this:
https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/issues/GEOS-10824

Now, we can add a discriminator to FlatGeoBufDataStoreFactory, or we might try to check for well known FGB extensions, sure, but these all look like workarounds for a simpler, more basic deficiency: as a user… I’ve already told GeoServer exactly what it should be using, and it even saved my choice… why would it try to guess it again? (especially after having looked up the factory by name anyways!)

What I’m proposing is a very modest change: in ResourcePool, while creating the store, if a factory has already been successfully looked up, please try to use it first, and fall back on the current dynamic lookup only if that fails. It’s a few lines change that should make both developer and user experience better. And I’ll also change it so that if the factory is not found, it won’t throw an exception (because really, it shouldn’t, it should try the dynamic lookup instead).

Objections?

Cheers
Andrea

···

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!

Visit http://bit.ly/gs-services-us for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions Group
phone: +39 0584 962313

fax: +39 0584 1660272

mob: +39 339 8844549

https://www.geosolutionsgroup.com/

http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it


Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia.

This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail

Wow, that’s scarier than I thought it would be. Sounds like a great improvement to me.

+1

Ian

(attachments)

image.png

···

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!

Visit http://bit.ly/gs-services-us for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions Group
phone: +39 0584 962313

fax: +39 0584 1660272

mob: +39 339 8844549

https://www.geosolutionsgroup.com/

http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it


Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia.

This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail

Yeah, the flexibility of letting the system choose has not really been taken advantage of.

Is a change needed at the geotools level also?

(attachments)

image.png

···


Jody Garnett

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!

Visit http://bit.ly/gs-services-us for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions Group
phone: +39 0584 962313

fax: +39 0584 1660272

mob: +39 339 8844549

https://www.geosolutionsgroup.com/

http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it


Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia.

This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail

On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 12:44 AM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com403…> wrote:

Yeah, the flexibility of letting the system choose has not really been taken advantage of.

It happened a couple of times actually… once switching from JDBC to JDBC-NG, and the other from WFS to WFS-NG.
As a community we are not big on rewrites (I’m more of a proponent of Theseus ship’s approach myself) so
it does not happen ofter that we need such migration pattern.

Is a change needed at the geotools level also?

Maybe adding a file extension check on the fgb store, but making it also optional?
Bjorn, is it common to have flatgeobuf files that have an extension other than .fgb?

Cheers
Andrea

PR here: https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/7782

···

Regards,

Andrea Aime

==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!

Visit http://bit.ly/gs-services-us for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions Group
phone: +39 0584 962313

fax: +39 0584 1660272

mob: +39 339 8844549

https://www.geosolutionsgroup.com/

http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it


Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia.

This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail