Transition to Database Server: Difference between revisions

From CCMDB Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m moved content from my reminder task into here.
m m
Line 1: Line 1:
CCMDB will eventually outgrow Microsoft Access as a storage format. We are investigating storing the data with [[Decision Support Services]].  
CCMDB will eventually outgrow Microsoft Access as a storage format. We are investigating storing the data with [[Decision Support Services]].  


*2016-10-24 sent follow-up email
*2016-10-12 sent follow-up email
*2016-10-12 sent follow-up email
*2016-10-03-- Meeting booked for.
*2016-10-03-- Meeting booked for.

Revision as of 09:59, 2016 October 24

CCMDB will eventually outgrow Microsoft Access as a storage format. We are investigating storing the data with Decision Support Services.

  • 2016-10-24 sent follow-up email
  • 2016-10-12 sent follow-up email
  • 2016-10-03-- Meeting booked for.
  • 2016-09-22 emailed Trevor with likely structure.
  • 2016-09-22 sent email about how to get data to Trevor
  • 2016-09-19 made new structure; asked Trevor how to get it to him.
  • 2016-09-15 met w Dr Roberts and confirmed it’s ok to go ahead with preliminary testing
  • 2016-09-08 discussion with Trevor Strome
    • ODBC connections should be possible
      • Ability write and ? change tables
    • Sticking point: auditing
    • Terms and conditions changes – spongy answers
    • Reporting: sql mgr, then anything that has ODBC connectivity SSRS MS reporting services
  • Funding? …if there is a cost we want to keep it reasonable (can’t get better answer)
  • Ownership of data? Will others look into our data
    • Some should be accessible by all or many, to be discussed with owners
    • Research by eg U of M special use of would go back to owners
  • 2016-08-04 Trevor emailed that things should start in Sept/Oct and we will need to discuss architecture. Asked for scope.
  • 2016-08-03 emailed for update
  • 2016-06-12 replied to let me know if I can help

Trevor: “We’ve made some very positive progress in bringing our SQL server on-line and accessing much of our other clinical datamarts (i.e., EDIS, ADT, etc) through direct queries. There are still a few governance/policy annoyances that we’re navigating, but overall things are looking good. If we connect in the next few weeks I should be able to provide you more information, and we can begin to sketch out how an architecture might look.”

  • 2016-06-02 emailed for follow-up
  • 2016-05-19 Trevor Strome (DSS) thinks there might be a way to get us a SQL server to store our data; waiting to hear back.