This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2018-04-16
Channels
- # atlanta-clojurians (1)
- # aws (1)
- # beginners (65)
- # boot (4)
- # cider (81)
- # cljs-dev (25)
- # cljsrn (27)
- # clojure (129)
- # clojure-dusseldorf (12)
- # clojure-italy (68)
- # clojure-norway (5)
- # clojure-poland (4)
- # clojure-spec (14)
- # clojure-uk (72)
- # clojurescript (144)
- # code-reviews (19)
- # copenhagen-clojurians (5)
- # cursive (16)
- # datomic (21)
- # editors (1)
- # emacs (15)
- # events (1)
- # figwheel (6)
- # fulcro (54)
- # graphql (1)
- # hoplon (24)
- # jobs (6)
- # jobs-discuss (2)
- # keechma (4)
- # leiningen (6)
- # luminus (17)
- # lumo (2)
- # off-topic (43)
- # onyx (6)
- # pedestal (2)
- # perun (2)
- # portkey (3)
- # re-frame (22)
- # reagent (11)
- # ring-swagger (5)
- # shadow-cljs (46)
- # specter (8)
- # test-check (2)
- # testing (3)
- # vim (16)
- # yada (1)
I wonder if you can get away with building your own for-Lambda VPC and using VPC peering to “attach” to the Cloud VPC without having to manually make any changes to it
also thank you for figuring that out, @cjsauer. If this Slack had a karma-bot I would give you a kudo
>building your own for-Lambda VPC @chris_johnson that's a good idea. In that same line of thinking, it'd be really cool if the Datomic Cloud stack included a few private subnets (or even a separate VPC like you mentioned) out-of-the-box for client applications.
@stijn maybe not exactly what you're after, but there is some sample code for doing schema conformance in the day of datomic repo: https://github.com/Datomic/day-of-datomic/blob/master/src/datomic/samples/schema.clj
@calvin, yeah I can use that until transaction functions (or similar) are available in datomic cloud. Thanks!
How to model property graphs with Datomic? E.g. given a sentence like "Lawrence of Arabia rode 100km on horseback over 3 days," how can we model the semantic facts that can be extracted from the sentence including the context so that unit bases are not lost, e.g. facts: [{:db/id "sentence1" :source/text "Lawrence of Arabia rode 100km over 3 days" :subject {:db/id "person1" :person/name "Lawrence of Arabia"} :travel/distance {:distance/meters 300000 :distance/unit :km} :travel/time {:time/hours 72 :time/unit :days}}]
. It bothers me that I'm having to make "component" entities when it feels like these aren't really entities, just facts about facts. I heard @stuarthalloway mention that transaction metadata might be more suitable for "edge attributes", but this means I have to trigger multiple transactions where one would suffice. Has anyone had trouble with this? Is this Datomic the right tool for the job here?
@petrus where did @stuarthalloway mention this? out of curiosity
take it as hearsay until I can recall the source, because I heard it several weeks ago on a podcast about a podcast of which I don't recall the name. It got me thinking that yes, edge attrs can be modelled as tx-meta, but it doesn't feel natural
@petrus without more context on what he said, that sounds very odd. In my opinion if you have edge data to store, you should represent the edge as an entity
take it as hearsay until I can recall the source, because I heard it several weeks ago on a podcast about a podcast of which I don't recall the name. It got me thinking that yes, edge attrs can be modelled as tx-meta, but it doesn't feel natural
@petrus I would probably use something like an enum for things like your distance and time units
i’m also unsure why you need nested entities for travel/distance, travel/time, and subject
I use sub-entities to retain context, so that I can adjust the source content in the dimension it was provided in, e.g. to show you a slider to change the no. of travel days, instead of basing it in unix timestamp seconds
if the nested entities have an explicit ID (like your :subject one does) they are entities with their own existence
i.e. if you have other sentences about “Lawrence of Arabia”, then yes, probably make a separate entity for it
how to answer, "who travelled 100km?" without tracking the subject of the activity as a person entity? Or, " who travelled on horseback?"
it really depends on how complex the possible data model is if all your entities are “things that can travel” then their travel means and travel distances can be attributes directly on that entity (maybe)
but if you’re interested in the travel itself, it may be worth reifying them as their own set of entities with references to the ‘things’ (the entities) that did the traveling
how to answer, "who travelled 100km?" without tracking the subject of the activity as a person entity? Or, " who travelled on horseback?"
I use sub-entities to retain context, so that I can adjust the source content in the dimension it was provided in, e.g. to show you a slider to change the no. of travel days, instead of basing it in unix timestamp seconds