CFE Inline Integrity Checks: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
===What sort of checks do we actually want? === | ===What sort of checks do we actually want? === | ||
{{ | {{Discuss | | ||
* This would best be based on things Pagasa is likely to check and change, and I think she most likely changes the following: | |||
** [[Service tmp entry]] and [[Boarding Loc]] and [[Transfer Ready DtTm tmp entry]] and [[Dispo DtTm]]s | |||
* So checks I can think of would be: | |||
** [[Service tmp entry]] and [[Boarding Loc]] and [[Transfer Ready DtTm tmp entry]] and [[Dispo DtTm]]s | |||
** All S, B, T have to be before D | ** All S, B, T have to be before D | ||
** any T has to be after | ** any T has to be after the B it's linked to | ||
** | ** any S/B has to be before any CCI and ICD10, and D has to be after these | ||
* Pagasa, Julie, can you think of other things to check? Would running these queries just before vetting work for Pagasa? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 16:24, 2022 August 9 (CDT) | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 16:24, 2022 August 9
CFE editing - need integrity checks in place to catch editing errors
- Admit transfer discharge range as from CCMDB
Why not to do this inline?
- What would trigger the checks? We don't have "complete" to trigger a check, so what would trigger it? on_change has problems when used on comparison of multiple fields.
Best to not do this inline after all.
- We'll want to add some "post processing checks" that Pagasa would run after all edits for a day. To be done between Quality Assurance queries in CFE and actually setting records to "vetted".
What sort of checks do we actually want?
|
Related articles
Related articles: |