Hello all,
During the last chat with ITC we decided that the resource code was to input manually. They wanted it to be automatic but at this time it isn't feasible. Our meeting was brief but we settled the problems.
Today the librarian team met and upgraded our data base system and altered its design. It seems to be going very well.
Everyone...
Keep up the good work!
--
Yianni
Friday, April 27, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
Database Design Cont.
RFP Letter
The RFP letter had various revisions and was approved by our professor to be sent to the database design students. Deadlines mentioned were ones provided by the professor. The RFP detailed what was needed for the database design which were the ERD, table schemas, and SQL code for table creation.
A copy of the letters sent out can be viewed on the wiki : http://atlantis.seidenberg.pace.edu/wiki/librarian2007/Design or in our Database design binder in the CSIS building.
* How would you improve the RFP letter?
I think if a template would have been provided of what previous students have done or what is done in the real world, then I think the RFP letters would have been more professional. Also providing a reasonable deadline for the database designs would have been better since we had to extend the deadline for the database design due to changes in the project timeline.
Database Evaluation
The database design was evaluated by the team leaders with the input from the team members. Due to conflicts in our schedules only the team leaders were able to meet to go over the 3 design documents in extensive detail and scrutiny. We asked questions to the grad mentors aboutthe database design and they provided feedback. A list of pros and cons was created for each database design and which ever had the most pros was the one we chose.
The evaluation was done by the team leaders. Time dedicated to this task was approximately 10 hours. Veronica and I met twice to discuss the designs after having read the design documents ourselves.
Although I cannot say that we are experts, Veronica and I had enough knowledge to choose the correct design and if we had any doubt we consulted with the graduate mentors and the team members.
Problems/Concerns
The main problems in the db design proposed were the lack of constraints for the tables as well as trying to understand what some fields meant because they did not look familiar to any of requirements.
There was some confusion between 1st draft and final draft since they were sent one after another without having too much time to review the first.
Feedback/Follow-ups
I believe that we were able to follow as much as we could in answering their questions. We had some issues because some questions we could not answer very well and forwarded the questions to the ITC students.
Final Acceptance/Rejection
I think we were very clear in our rejection letters. We listed the reasons why we rejected their design as well as giving the Indian students to ask us questions about our decision.
* Why did you accept the design you accepted? Please list all the reasons.
1. Very well organized
2. SQL Code to generate tables
3. Fully explained ERDs
4. Well documented
The reasons why we rejected the other db designs were :
1. No SQL Code provided
2. Unorganized documentation
3. Missing attributes or constraints in the tables
Reaction to Acceptance/Rejection Letters
We did not get any reaction from the Unv. of Delhi Students regarding the rejection letters. We got further inquiries from the team that was accepted.
-Lorena
The RFP letter had various revisions and was approved by our professor to be sent to the database design students. Deadlines mentioned were ones provided by the professor. The RFP detailed what was needed for the database design which were the ERD, table schemas, and SQL code for table creation.
A copy of the letters sent out can be viewed on the wiki : http://atlantis.seidenberg.pace.edu/wiki/librarian2007/Design or in our Database design binder in the CSIS building.
* How would you improve the RFP letter?
I think if a template would have been provided of what previous students have done or what is done in the real world, then I think the RFP letters would have been more professional. Also providing a reasonable deadline for the database designs would have been better since we had to extend the deadline for the database design due to changes in the project timeline.
Database Evaluation
The database design was evaluated by the team leaders with the input from the team members. Due to conflicts in our schedules only the team leaders were able to meet to go over the 3 design documents in extensive detail and scrutiny. We asked questions to the grad mentors aboutthe database design and they provided feedback. A list of pros and cons was created for each database design and which ever had the most pros was the one we chose.
The evaluation was done by the team leaders. Time dedicated to this task was approximately 10 hours. Veronica and I met twice to discuss the designs after having read the design documents ourselves.
Although I cannot say that we are experts, Veronica and I had enough knowledge to choose the correct design and if we had any doubt we consulted with the graduate mentors and the team members.
Problems/Concerns
The main problems in the db design proposed were the lack of constraints for the tables as well as trying to understand what some fields meant because they did not look familiar to any of requirements.
There was some confusion between 1st draft and final draft since they were sent one after another without having too much time to review the first.
Feedback/Follow-ups
I believe that we were able to follow as much as we could in answering their questions. We had some issues because some questions we could not answer very well and forwarded the questions to the ITC students.
Final Acceptance/Rejection
I think we were very clear in our rejection letters. We listed the reasons why we rejected their design as well as giving the Indian students to ask us questions about our decision.
* Why did you accept the design you accepted? Please list all the reasons.
1. Very well organized
2. SQL Code to generate tables
3. Fully explained ERDs
4. Well documented
The reasons why we rejected the other db designs were :
1. No SQL Code provided
2. Unorganized documentation
3. Missing attributes or constraints in the tables
Reaction to Acceptance/Rejection Letters
We did not get any reaction from the Unv. of Delhi Students regarding the rejection letters. We got further inquiries from the team that was accepted.
-Lorena
Monday, April 16, 2007
Update
Hello all,
Last week the two US teams had a meeting about the design documents with the graduate students. We went over each groups design document while going over any questions the graduate students had. We then went over the requiremnts document trying to find which features could share code so we could save time. Things are really coming along .
keep up the good work!
--
Yianni
Last week the two US teams had a meeting about the design documents with the graduate students. We went over each groups design document while going over any questions the graduate students had. We then went over the requiremnts document trying to find which features could share code so we could save time. Things are really coming along .
keep up the good work!
--
Yianni
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
DB-RFP acception/rejection process
Last week it was decided which database design provided by the three teams in the University of Delhi was going to be used for the build of the database for the MultiLib system. The following is the process that we used in the database design:
Due to availability constraints, only the leaders of each team in the US were able to review in detail the database designs. The team members were made aware of the process and the reasons behind the decision in which they agreed.
- Created draft RFP's
- Prof. Scharff reviewed and approved RFP's
- Waited on response from Unv. of Delhi students
- Received the 3 database designs
- Compared RFP and requirements documents to the db document
- Analyzed the table attributes, constraints, and relationships between the db entities
- Weighed the pros and cons of each design
- Determined from all of this which design to accept.
- Sent accept/reject letters to the 3 database teams.
Due to availability constraints, only the leaders of each team in the US were able to review in detail the database designs. The team members were made aware of the process and the reasons behind the decision in which they agreed.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Update
Hello everyone,
This week the librarian team and the student team will be joining forces to decide on the database design for the project. Coding for the project will also commence this week.
Before the last meeting, which was on Friday, the Cambodians electricity went out so our meet was unexpectedly cut short :(
keep up the good work
-yianni
This week the librarian team and the student team will be joining forces to decide on the database design for the project. Coding for the project will also commence this week.
Before the last meeting, which was on Friday, the Cambodians electricity went out so our meet was unexpectedly cut short :(
keep up the good work
-yianni
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)