Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Turn link tree into JSON #142

Closed
KingAkeem opened this issue Oct 19, 2018 · 8 comments
Closed

Turn link tree into JSON #142

KingAkeem opened this issue Oct 19, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

@KingAkeem
Copy link
Member

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
We need to be able to insert our trees into a DB and this will be easily done as JSON if we can figure out an algorithm/library/etc that can convert the link tree into a JSON object that can be stored.

Describe the solution you'd like
Not sure yet, open to suggestions.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 19, 2018

If you already have a linked tree, might consider using a document database to alleviate conversion?

@PSNAppz PSNAppz removed this from the TorBot v1.3 milestone Oct 19, 2018
@KingAkeem
Copy link
Member Author

What's a document database? I'm not aware of this concept, it may be a perfect solution.

@cardinalion
Copy link

Document-oriented database is one kind of NoSQL db, MongoDB is a common one.

@KingAkeem
Copy link
Member Author

Sounds like it could be useful for this case, would you like to take on the task?

@cardinalion
Copy link

I'm not very clear. Do you want to save the trees in mongodb? If so, will the trees be modified frequently?

@KingAkeem
Copy link
Member Author

KingAkeem commented Oct 10, 2019

I think that'd be a pretty cool feature. The trees won't be modified frequently at runtime. I was thinking that we could add an option so that users could store the trees in a DB that could be queried to retrieve the tree. The workflow would be

  1. User inputs a command to generate a tree with a given URL and a flag to insert it into the DB.
  2. After the tree is inserted
    a. User should be able to query for the tree.
    b. User should be able to remove the tree.
    c. User should be able to visualize a tree that exist within the DB
    d. User should be able to download a tree that exist within the DB

Does that make sense?

@fepitre
Copy link
Contributor

fepitre commented Oct 27, 2019

I think that'd be a pretty cool feature. The trees won't be modified frequently at runtime. I was thinking that we could add an option so that users could store the trees in a DB that could be queried to retrieve the tree. The workflow would be

1. User inputs a command to generate a tree with a given URL and a flag to insert it into the DB.

2. After the tree is inserted
   a. User should be able to query for the tree.
   b. User should be able to remove the tree.
   c. User should be able to visualize a tree that exist within the DB
   d. User should be able to download a tree that exist within the DB

Does that make sense?

IMHO, it's a good start. I'm currently working on a prototype but the achievements of your points 2 are currently done using a separate tool. I'm not sure if it should be integrated or not in the main script.

@KingAkeem
Copy link
Member Author

KingAkeem commented Oct 28, 2019

The options (query, remove, visualize, download) should be integrated into the main function because we'll need to be read the arguments from the user.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants