Schema image / ER Diagram is out of date

[bernhard-hofmann]

Whilst I like the image of the schema, it's not auto-generated on updates to the SQL script so it could be misleading.

The version there is generated by a tool called DataGrip from JetBrains which is not free.

[bernhard-hofmann]

My recommendation would be to (in order of preference):

1. generate it on updates to the SQL script (are there tools to do that, online maybe?)
2. remove it
3. give the filename a date and time to make it clear when it was generated

[Dhara159]

@bernhard-hofmann Please check the reference if you are talking about something like this:

https://sqldbm.com/Home/

DEMO Link: https://app.sqldbm.com/PostgreSQL/Share/D2_vEBIrEiAJR9khhTwB-EGFrngIE8md_DYjF4jNYw0

**Pricing: 1 active project in your Free plan **

If yes, then i can take initiative to complete this task!

[valishah]

@Dhara159: Seems the free plan comes with max. 3 revisions. I don't think it would be a good idea to go with it. As @bernhard-hofmann mentioned, It would be helpful to give a date along with the filename to maintain the revisions

[dmmulroy]

I believe that open source solutions like DBeaver and PGAdmin have capabilities for generating ER diagrams. I did a quick search and didn't find anything to easily automate it though.

Here's an updated diagram based on what's in master right now.

[dmmulroy]

Also, given that Chapter has now been decided to be a self-hosted solution I'm not sure this schema makes 100% sense any more, especially if there is no "central" service for keeping track of all users/groups/events across all instances.

And honestly if it's self hosted by individual orgs/groups postgres might even be overkill and sqlite might be a simpler alternative.

[allella]

@kognise also has a proposed "terminology" update to the readme to call a "chapter" effectively what a "group" is in the schema. Group is pretty vague and it would be nice to have some parity between the core item in the schema and what we're referring to in the business logic terminology.

So, can we change "groups" to "chapters"?

[allella]

@nik-john is changing "group(s)" to "chapter(s)", so when this get's updated then please reflect those changes in the schema image.
#17 (comment)

[nik-john]

@nik-john is changing "group(s)" to "chapter(s)", so when this get's updated then please reflect those changes in the schema image.
#17 (comment)

You can see the changes here cc: @kognise @allella

[bernhard-hofmann]

Sorry to ask, but can we bring this issue back on topic?

I'd really like a schema diagram; I find them very useful to understand the schema without having to create the image in my head from SQL text.

But how are we going to ensure it's kept up to date without relying on one person to re-create it whenever someone updates the SQL?

I'll have a look at DBeaver and PGAdmin, thanks @dmmulroy. Maybe we can include steps asking that PRs that update the SQL include an updated schema image?

[dmmulroy]

I think requesting an updated schema image is a reasonable request, esp. if DBeaver and PGAdmin diagrams are acceptable.

[allella]

@dmmulroy I think an up to date image from tool X is better than an outdated one from DataGrip, so if you can generate a new image and to a PR then I suspect folks will like it. Also, #46 is merged in so a lot has changed on the ddl.sql.

#72
#57
#53
might change the schema sooner than later, but better to have something fresh than wait until all the changes have been finalized.

Also, if we changed the readme to link to
https://github.com/freeCodeCamp/chapter/raw/master/data/schema.png
then we wouldn't need to update the readme every time the schema image changes. Whether that's a Github-happy pattern or not, I don't know, but it should eliminate one chore.