tandem
/
numerus
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 39 Pull Requests Packages Projects 1 Releases 1 Wiki Activity
numerus/sqitch.plan

72 lines
9.8 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Initialize Sqitch configuration
2023-01-12 18:37:48 +00:00
%syntax-version=1.0.0
Setup authentication schema and user relation User authentication is based on PostgREST’s[0]: There is a noninherit role, authenticator, whose function is only to switch to a different role according to the application’s session. Accordingly, this role has no permission for anything. The roles that this authentication can switch to are guest, invoicer, or admin. Guest is for anonymous users, when they need to login or register; invoicers are regular users; and admin are application’s administrators, that can change other user’s status, when they have to be removed or have they password changed, for example. The user relation is actually inaccessible to all roles and can only be used through a security definer function, login, so that passwords are not accessible from the application. I hesitated on what to use as the user’s primary key. The email seemed a good candiate, because it will be used for login. But something rubs me the wrong way. It is not that they can change because, despite what people on the Internet keeps parroting, they do not need to be “immutable”, PostgreSQL can cascade updates to foreign keys, and people do **not** change email addresses that ofter. What i **do** know is that email addresses should be unique in order to be used for login and password, hovewer i had to decide what “unique” means here, because the domain part is case insensitive, but the local part who knows? I made the arbitrary decision of assuming that the whole address is case sensitive. I have the feeling that this will bite me harder in the ass than using it as the primary key. [0]: https://postgrest.org/en/stable/auth.html
2023-01-13 00:43:20 +00:00
%project=numerus
%uri=https://numerus.tandem.blog/
Initialize Sqitch configuration
2023-01-12 18:37:48 +00:00
Add a function to set request settings and the role I did not like the idea that it was the Go server who should set values such as request.user or set the role, because this is mostly something that only the database wants for itself, such as when calling logout. I am also planning to use these setings for row security with the user’s id, that the Go application has no need for, but with the current approach i would need to return it from check_cookie so that it can return it back to the database when acquiring the connection. I would have used the same function to set the settings and the role, but security definer functions—obviously in retrospect—can not set the role, because then could switch to any role of the user that defined the function, not the roles they are member of. Thus, a new function. I did not want to do that every time i needed the database connection within the same request, because it would perform the same operations each time—it is the same cookie, afterall—, so new connections are request scoped and passed along in the context.
2023-01-19 12:07:32 +00:00
roles 2023-01-12T18:42:16Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add database roles
schema_auth [roles] 2023-01-12T19:15:55Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add authentication schema
schema_public [roles] 2023-01-12T19:24:29Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Set privileges to public schema
schema_numerus [roles] 2023-01-12T22:57:22Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add application schema
extension_citext [schema_public] 2023-01-12T23:03:33Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add citext extension
email [schema_numerus extension_citext] 2023-01-12T23:09:59Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add email domain
Add user_profile view to update the profile with form Since users do not have access to the auth scheme, i had to add a view that selects only the data that they can see of themselves (i.e., no password or cookie). I wanted to use the `request.user.id` setting that i set in check_cookie, but this would be bad because anyone can change that parameter and, since the view is created by the owner, could see and *change* the values of everyone just by knowing their id. Thus, now i use the cookie instead, because it is way harder to figure out, and if you already have it you can just set to your browser and the user is fucked anyway; the database can not help here. I **am** going to use the user id in row level security policies, but not the value coming for the setting but instaed the one in the `user_profile`, since it already is “derived” from the cookie, that’s why i added that column to the view. The profile includes the language, that i do not use it yet to switch the locale, so i had to add a relation of the available languages, for constraint purposes. There is no NULL language, and instead i added the “Undefined” language, with ‘und’ tag’, to represent “do not know/use content negotiation”. The languages in that relation are the same i used to have inside locale.go, because there is no point on having options for languages i do not have the translation for, so i now configure the list of available languages user in content negotiation from that relation. Finally, i have added all font from RemixIcon because that’s what we used in the design and i am going to use quite a lot of them. There is duplication in the views; i will address that in a different commit.
2023-01-22 01:23:09 +00:00
language [schema_numerus] 2023-01-21T20:55:49Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation of available languages
Add the company relation and read-only form to edit I do not have more time to update the update to the company today, but i believe this is already a good amount of work for a commit. The company is going to be used for row level security, as users will only have access to the data from companies they are granted access, by virtue of being in the company_user relation. I did not know how add a row level security policy to the company_user because i needed the to select on the same relation and this is not allowed, because it would create an infinite loop. Had to add the vat, pg_libphonenumber, and uri extensions in order to validate VAT identification numbers, phone numbers, and URIs, repectively. These libraries are not in Debian, but i created packages for them all in https://dev.tandem.ws/tandem.
2023-01-24 20:46:07 +00:00
user [roles schema_auth email language] 2023-01-12T23:44:03Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Create user relation
Add a function to set request settings and the role I did not like the idea that it was the Go server who should set values such as request.user or set the role, because this is mostly something that only the database wants for itself, such as when calling logout. I am also planning to use these setings for row security with the user’s id, that the Go application has no need for, but with the current approach i would need to return it from check_cookie so that it can return it back to the database when acquiring the connection. I would have used the same function to set the settings and the role, but security definer functions—obviously in retrospect—can not set the role, because then could switch to any role of the user that defined the function, not the roles they are member of. Thus, a new function. I did not want to do that every time i needed the database connection within the same request, because it would perform the same operations each time—it is the same cookie, afterall—, so new connections are request scoped and passed along in the context.
2023-01-19 12:07:32 +00:00
ensure_role_exists [schema_auth user] 2023-01-12T23:57:59Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add trigger to ensure the user’s role exists
extension_pgcrypto [schema_auth] 2023-01-13T00:11:50Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add pgcrypto extension
encrypt_password [schema_auth user extension_pgcrypto] 2023-01-13T00:14:30Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add trigger to encrypt user’s password
Add the company relation and read-only form to edit I do not have more time to update the update to the company today, but i believe this is already a good amount of work for a commit. The company is going to be used for row level security, as users will only have access to the data from companies they are granted access, by virtue of being in the company_user relation. I did not know how add a row level security policy to the company_user because i needed the to select on the same relation and this is not allowed, because it would create an infinite loop. Had to add the vat, pg_libphonenumber, and uri extensions in order to validate VAT identification numbers, phone numbers, and URIs, repectively. These libraries are not in Debian, but i created packages for them all in https://dev.tandem.ws/tandem.
2023-01-24 20:46:07 +00:00
login_attempt [schema_auth] 2023-01-17T14:05:49Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation to log login attempts
Add a function to set request settings and the role I did not like the idea that it was the Go server who should set values such as request.user or set the role, because this is mostly something that only the database wants for itself, such as when calling logout. I am also planning to use these setings for row security with the user’s id, that the Go application has no need for, but with the current approach i would need to return it from check_cookie so that it can return it back to the database when acquiring the connection. I would have used the same function to set the settings and the role, but security definer functions—obviously in retrospect—can not set the role, because then could switch to any role of the user that defined the function, not the roles they are member of. Thus, a new function. I did not want to do that every time i needed the database connection within the same request, because it would perform the same operations each time—it is the same cookie, afterall—, so new connections are request scoped and passed along in the context.
2023-01-19 12:07:32 +00:00
login [roles schema_numerus schema_auth extension_pgcrypto email user login_attempt] 2023-01-13T00:32:32Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to login
Use user’ß email for auth funcs and return cookie on email change This is for security, just in case two users have the same cookie, althought it is unlikely, but nevertheless less guessable. I also need to refresh the cookie when the user changes their email address, because it is liked toghether. It does mean that it will logout from everywhere else, but i can not do anything about that.
2023-01-23 20:18:55 +00:00
current_user_cookie [schema_numerus] 2023-01-21T20:16:28Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to get the cookie of the current Numerus’ user
current_user_email [schema_numerus] 2023-01-23T19:11:53Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to get the email of the current Numerus’ user
build_cookie [schema_numerus current_user_email current_user_cookie] 2023-01-23T19:46:13Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to build the cookie for the current user
check_cookie [schema_public user build_cookie] 2023-01-17T17:48:49Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to check if a user cookie is valid
logout [schema_auth current_user_email current_user_cookie user] 2023-01-17T19:10:21Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to logout
Allow guest access to user_profile with an empty profile I want this so that the Go application does not need to know the exact details of the settings that the database sets when applying the cookie; it just needs to select from the user_profile that already knows this. Also, that way i can get the user’s language from its profile with a single select, without having to check whether we are guest or authenticated. With that, i can skip the content negotiation if the user already told us what language they want.
2023-01-23 00:18:47 +00:00
set_cookie [schema_public check_cookie] 2023-01-19T11:00:22Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to set the role based on the cookie
Add user_profile view to update the profile with form Since users do not have access to the auth scheme, i had to add a view that selects only the data that they can see of themselves (i.e., no password or cookie). I wanted to use the `request.user.id` setting that i set in check_cookie, but this would be bad because anyone can change that parameter and, since the view is created by the owner, could see and *change* the values of everyone just by knowing their id. Thus, now i use the cookie instead, because it is way harder to figure out, and if you already have it you can just set to your browser and the user is fucked anyway; the database can not help here. I **am** going to use the user id in row level security policies, but not the value coming for the setting but instaed the one in the `user_profile`, since it already is “derived” from the cookie, that’s why i added that column to the view. The profile includes the language, that i do not use it yet to switch the locale, so i had to add a relation of the available languages, for constraint purposes. There is no NULL language, and instead i added the “Undefined” language, with ‘und’ tag’, to represent “do not know/use content negotiation”. The languages in that relation are the same i used to have inside locale.go, because there is no point on having options for languages i do not have the translation for, so i now configure the list of available languages user in content negotiation from that relation. Finally, i have added all font from RemixIcon because that’s what we used in the design and i am going to use quite a lot of them. There is duplication in the views; i will address that in a different commit.
2023-01-22 01:23:09 +00:00
available_languages [schema_numerus language] 2023-01-21T21:11:08Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the initial available languages
Use user’ß email for auth funcs and return cookie on email change This is for security, just in case two users have the same cookie, althought it is unlikely, but nevertheless less guessable. I also need to refresh the cookie when the user changes their email address, because it is liked toghether. It does mean that it will logout from everywhere else, but i can not do anything about that.
2023-01-23 20:18:55 +00:00
user_profile [schema_numerus user current_user_email current_user_cookie] 2023-01-21T23:18:20Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add view for user profile
Add function to change the current user’s password This function does not ask for the confirmation because this is an user-facing issue, not for the database. Still missing: validation and proper error messages.
2023-01-23 20:41:14 +00:00
change_password [schema_numerus user] 2023-01-23T20:22:45Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to change the current user’s password
Add the company relation and read-only form to edit I do not have more time to update the update to the company today, but i believe this is already a good amount of work for a commit. The company is going to be used for row level security, as users will only have access to the data from companies they are granted access, by virtue of being in the company_user relation. I did not know how add a row level security policy to the company_user because i needed the to select on the same relation and this is not allowed, because it would create an infinite loop. Had to add the vat, pg_libphonenumber, and uri extensions in order to validate VAT identification numbers, phone numbers, and URIs, repectively. These libraries are not in Debian, but i created packages for them all in https://dev.tandem.ws/tandem.
2023-01-24 20:46:07 +00:00
extension_vat [schema_public] 2023-01-24T10:28:17Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add vat extension
extension_pg_libphonenumber [schema_public] 2023-01-24T13:50:14Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add extension for phone numbers
extension_uri [schema_public] 2023-01-24T14:29:29Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add extension for URIs
currency_code [schema_numerus] 2023-01-24T14:36:04Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the domain for currency code in ISO 4217
currency [schema_numerus currency_code] 2023-01-24T14:45:26Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the relation for currencies
available_currencies [schema_numerus currency] 2023-01-24T14:54:18Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the initial list of available currencies
Use a select for company’s country field At first we thought that a regular text field would do, because we were afraid that a dropdown would be worse from the point of view of user experience, but then we realized that we need the country code for VAT and phone validation, and we can not expect users to input that, of course. I had to add the first “i18n table” to the database with the name of all countries in both Catalan and Spanish and Catalan; English is the default. For now i think i do not need a view that would select the name based on the locale of the current request, because currently i do not plan on adding any other such table —the currency uses the code and the symbol, thus no need for localization. However, now i need the language tag from the locale in order to get the correct translation, and gotext does not give me any way to access the inner language. Thus the need for our Locale type.
2023-01-27 20:30:14 +00:00
country_code [schema_numerus] 2023-01-27T18:33:26Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add domain for country codes
country [schema_numerus country_code] 2023-01-27T18:39:44Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the relation for countries
country_i18n [schema_numerus country_code language country] 2023-01-27T19:20:43Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add table for localization of country names
Add the invoice_status relation and its i18n
2023-02-07 15:45:27 +00:00
available_countries [schema_numerus country country_i18n] 2023-01-27T18:49:28Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the list of available countries
Use a select for company’s country field At first we thought that a regular text field would do, because we were afraid that a dropdown would be worse from the point of view of user experience, but then we realized that we need the country code for VAT and phone validation, and we can not expect users to input that, of course. I had to add the first “i18n table” to the database with the name of all countries in both Catalan and Spanish and Catalan; English is the default. For now i think i do not need a view that would select the name based on the locale of the current request, because currently i do not plan on adding any other such table —the currency uses the code and the symbol, thus no need for localization. However, now i need the language tag from the locale in order to get the correct translation, and gotext does not give me any way to access the inner language. Thus the need for our Locale type.
2023-01-27 20:30:14 +00:00
company [schema_numerus extension_vat email extension_pg_libphonenumber extension_uri currency_code currency country_code country] 2023-01-24T15:03:15Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the relation for companies
Add the company relation and read-only form to edit I do not have more time to update the update to the company today, but i believe this is already a good amount of work for a commit. The company is going to be used for row level security, as users will only have access to the data from companies they are granted access, by virtue of being in the company_user relation. I did not know how add a row level security policy to the company_user because i needed the to select on the same relation and this is not allowed, because it would create an infinite loop. Had to add the vat, pg_libphonenumber, and uri extensions in order to validate VAT identification numbers, phone numbers, and URIs, repectively. These libraries are not in Debian, but i created packages for them all in https://dev.tandem.ws/tandem.
2023-01-24 20:46:07 +00:00
company_user [schema_numerus user company] 2023-01-24T17:50:06Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the relation of companies and their users
Add company’s default payment method I had to use a deferrable foreign key because the payment methods have a reference to the company, and the company now a circular reference to payment method.
2023-03-04 21:15:52 +00:00
payment_method [schema_numerus company] 2023-03-03T15:00:41Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation of payment method
company_default_payment_method [schema_numerus company payment_method] 2023-03-04T20:25:20Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the company’s default payment method property
Introduce the concept of tax class We want to show the percentage of the tax as columns in the invoice, but until now it was not possible to have a single VAT column when products have different VAT (e.g., 4 % and 10 %), because, as far as the application is concerned, these where ”different taxes”. We also think it would be hard later on to compute the tax due to the government. So, tax classes is just a taxonomy to be able to have different names and rates for the same type of tax, mostly VAT and retention in our case.
2023-02-28 11:02:27 +00:00
tax_class [schema_numerus company] 2023-02-28T10:13:14Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the relation for tax classes
Add the tax relation with very rough form and handler
2023-01-28 13:18:58 +00:00
tax_rate [schema_numerus] 2023-01-28T11:33:39Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add domain for tax rates
Introduce the concept of tax class We want to show the percentage of the tax as columns in the invoice, but until now it was not possible to have a single VAT column when products have different VAT (e.g., 4 % and 10 %), because, as far as the application is concerned, these where ”different taxes”. We also think it would be hard later on to compute the tax due to the government. So, tax classes is just a taxonomy to be able to have different names and rates for the same type of tax, mostly VAT and retention in our case.
2023-02-28 11:02:27 +00:00
tax [schema_numerus company tax_rate tax_class] 2023-01-28T11:45:47Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation for taxes
Replace tag relations with array attributes It all started when i wanted to try to filter invoices by multiple tags using an “AND”, instead of “OR” as it was doing until now. But something felt off and seemed to me that i was doing thing much more complex than needed, all to be able to list the tags as a suggestion in the input field—which i am not doing yet. I found this article series[0] exploring different approaches for tagging, which includes the one i was using, and comparing their performance. I have not actually tested it, but it seems that i have chosen the worst option, in both query time and storage. I attempted to try using an array attribute to each table, which is more or less the same they did in the articles but without using a separate relation for tags, and i found out that all the queries were way easier to write, and needed two joins less, so it was a no-brainer. [0]: http://www.databasesoup.com/2015/01/tag-all-things.html
2023-04-07 19:31:35 +00:00
tag_name [schema_numerus] 2023-03-10T11:06:11Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add domain for tag names
contact [schema_numerus company extension_vat email extension_pg_libphonenumber extension_uri country_code country tag_name] 2023-01-29T12:59:18Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the relation for contacts
product [schema_numerus company tax tag_name] 2023-02-04T09:17:24Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation for products
Convert from cents to “price” and back I do not want to use floats in the Go lang application, because it is not supposed to do anything with these values other than to print and retrieve them from the user; all computations will be performed by PostgreSQL in cents. That means i have to “convert” from the price format that users expect to see (e.g., 1.234,56) to cents (e.g., 123456) and back when passing data between Go and PostgreSQL, and that conversion depends on the currency’s decimal places. At first i did everything in Go, but saw that i would need to do it in a loop when retrieving the list of products, and immediately knew it was a mistake—i needed a PL/pgSQL function for that. I still need to convert from string to float, however, when printing the value to the user. Because the string representation is in C, but i need to format it according to the locale with golang/x/text. That package has the information of how to correctly format numbers, but it is in an internal package that i can not use, and numbers.Digit only accepts numeric types, not a string.
2023-02-05 12:55:12 +00:00
parse_price [schema_public] 2023-02-05T11:04:54Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to convert from price to cents
to_price [schema_numerus] 2023-02-05T11:46:31Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to format cents to prices
Add the invoice_status relation and its i18n
2023-02-07 15:45:27 +00:00
invoice_status [schema_numerus] 2023-02-07T14:50:26Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # A relation of invoice status
invoice_status_i18n [schema_numerus invoice_status language] 2023-02-07T14:56:18Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation for invoice status’ translatable texts
available_invoice_status [schema_numerus invoice_status invoice_status_i18n] 2023-02-07T15:07:06Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add the list of available invoice status
Allow multiple taxes, and even not tax, for products It seems that we do not agree en whether the IRPF tax should be something of the product or the contact, so we decided to make the product have multiple taxes, just in case, and if only one is needed, then users can just select one; no need to limit to one.
2023-02-08 12:47:36 +00:00
product_tax [schema_numerus product tax] 2023-02-08T11:36:49Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation of product taxes
Replace tag relations with array attributes It all started when i wanted to try to filter invoices by multiple tags using an “AND”, instead of “OR” as it was doing until now. But something felt off and seemed to me that i was doing thing much more complex than needed, all to be able to list the tags as a suggestion in the input field—which i am not doing yet. I found this article series[0] exploring different approaches for tagging, which includes the one i was using, and comparing their performance. I have not actually tested it, but it seems that i have chosen the worst option, in both query time and storage. I attempted to try using an array attribute to each table, which is more or less the same they did in the articles but without using a separate relation for tags, and i found out that all the queries were way easier to write, and needed two joins less, so it was a no-brainer. [0]: http://www.databasesoup.com/2015/01/tag-all-things.html
2023-04-07 19:31:35 +00:00
invoice [schema_numerus company contact invoice_status payment_method currency tag_name] 2023-02-09T09:52:21Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation for invoice
Add discount_rate domain and invoice_product relation I store again the product’s name, description, and prices, because they are bound to change, but the invoice should remain the same always. That makes me wonder if i should do the same for seller’s and buyer’s data, but that should be a different commit. I’ve added the discount_rate domain because then i can test it independently of the invoice_product relation, moreover i am sure i will need it for simplified invoices too.
2023-02-10 18:02:04 +00:00
discount_rate [schema_numerus] 2023-02-10T17:22:40Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add domain for discount rates
invoice_product [schema_numerus invoice discount_rate] 2023-02-10T17:07:08Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation for invoice product
Replace tag relations with array attributes It all started when i wanted to try to filter invoices by multiple tags using an “AND”, instead of “OR” as it was doing until now. But something felt off and seemed to me that i was doing thing much more complex than needed, all to be able to list the tags as a suggestion in the input field—which i am not doing yet. I found this article series[0] exploring different approaches for tagging, which includes the one i was using, and comparing their performance. I have not actually tested it, but it seems that i have chosen the worst option, in both query time and storage. I attempted to try using an array attribute to each table, which is more or less the same they did in the articles but without using a separate relation for tags, and i found out that all the queries were way easier to write, and needed two joins less, so it was a no-brainer. [0]: http://www.databasesoup.com/2015/01/tag-all-things.html
2023-04-07 19:31:35 +00:00
add_product [schema_numerus product product_tax parse_price company currency tag_name] 2023-02-14T10:32:18Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to add new products
edit_product [schema_numerus product product_tax parse_price company currency tag_name] 2023-02-14T11:06:03Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to edit products
Add invoice product tax relation
2023-02-15 13:49:06 +00:00
invoice_product_tax [schema_numerus invoice_product tax tax_rate] 2023-02-15T13:20:30Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation for taxes in invoice products
Add function to edit invoices
2023-03-11 19:58:20 +00:00
new_invoice_product [schema_numerus discount_rate] 2023-02-16T21:06:01Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add type for passing products to new invoices
Add the function to get the next invoice number I can not use a PostgreSQL sequence because invoices need to be gapless, and sequences are designed to not rollback, for performance reasons. In this case, the performance is secondary because the law does not care.
2023-02-17 13:48:24 +00:00
invoice_number_counter [schema_numerus company] 2023-02-17T13:04:48Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add relation to count invoice numbers
next_invoice_number [schema_numerus invoice_number_counter] 2023-02-17T13:21:48Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to retrieve the next invoice number
Replace tag relations with array attributes It all started when i wanted to try to filter invoices by multiple tags using an “AND”, instead of “OR” as it was doing until now. But something felt off and seemed to me that i was doing thing much more complex than needed, all to be able to list the tags as a suggestion in the input field—which i am not doing yet. I found this article series[0] exploring different approaches for tagging, which includes the one i was using, and comparing their performance. I have not actually tested it, but it seems that i have chosen the worst option, in both query time and storage. I attempted to try using an array attribute to each table, which is more or less the same they did in the articles but without using a separate relation for tags, and i found out that all the queries were way easier to write, and needed two joins less, so it was a no-brainer. [0]: http://www.databasesoup.com/2015/01/tag-all-things.html
2023-04-07 19:31:35 +00:00
add_invoice [schema_numerus invoice company currency parse_price new_invoice_product tax invoice_product invoice_product_tax next_invoice_number tag_name] 2023-02-16T21:12:46Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to create new invoices
Add views to compute taxes and total amount of invoices They are not functions because i need to join them with the main invoice relation, and although possible is a bit more awkward with functions. The taxes have their own relation because i will need them grouped by their name in the PDF, so it will probably be a select for that relation.
2023-02-22 13:39:38 +00:00
invoice_tax_amount [schema_numerus invoice_product invoice_product_tax] 2023-02-22T12:08:35Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add view for invoice tax amount
Add discount and tax classes columns to invoice This was actually the (first) reason we added the tax classes: to show them in columns on the invoice—without the class we would need a column for each tax rate, even though they are the same tax. The invoice design has the product total with taxes at the last column, above the tax base, that i am not so sure about, but it seems that it has not brought any problem whatsoever so far, so it remains as is. Had to reduce the invoice’s font size to give more space to the table or the columns would be right next to each other. Oriol also told me to add more vertical spacing to the table’s footer.
2023-03-01 13:08:12 +00:00
invoice_product_amount [schema_numerus invoice_product invoice_product_tax] 2023-03-01T11:18:05Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add view for invoice product subtotal and total
invoice_amount [schema_numerus invoice_product invoice_product_amount] 2023-02-22T12:58:46Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add view to compute subtotal and total for invoices
Show the invoice subtotal, taxes, and total when creating it
2023-02-23 14:31:57 +00:00
new_invoice_amount [schema_numerus] 2023-02-23T12:08:25Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add type to return when computing new invoice amounts
compute_new_invoice_amount [schema_numerus company currency tax new_invoice_product new_invoice_amount] 2023-02-23T12:20:13Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to compute the subtotal, taxes, and total amounts for a new invoice
Add function to edit invoices
2023-03-11 19:58:20 +00:00
edited_invoice_product [schema_numerus discount_rate] 2023-03-11T19:22:24Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add typo for passing products to edited invoices
Replace tag relations with array attributes It all started when i wanted to try to filter invoices by multiple tags using an “AND”, instead of “OR” as it was doing until now. But something felt off and seemed to me that i was doing thing much more complex than needed, all to be able to list the tags as a suggestion in the input field—which i am not doing yet. I found this article series[0] exploring different approaches for tagging, which includes the one i was using, and comparing their performance. I have not actually tested it, but it seems that i have chosen the worst option, in both query time and storage. I attempted to try using an array attribute to each table, which is more or less the same they did in the articles but without using a separate relation for tags, and i found out that all the queries were way easier to write, and needed two joins less, so it was a no-brainer. [0]: http://www.databasesoup.com/2015/01/tag-all-things.html
2023-04-07 19:31:35 +00:00
edit_invoice [schema_numerus invoice currency parse_price edited_invoice_product tax invoice_product invoice_product_tax tag_name] 2023-03-11T18:30:50Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to edit invoices
Add tags for contacts too With Oriol we agreed that contacts should have tags, too, and that the “tag pool”, as it were, should be shared with the one for invoices (and all future tags we might add). I added the contact_tag relation and tag_contact function, just like with invoices, and then realized that the SQL queries that Go had to execute were becoming “complex” enough: i had to get not only the slug, but the contact id to call tag_contact, and all inside a transaction. Therefore, i opted to create the add_contact and edit_contact functions, that mirror those for invoice and products, so now each “major” section has these functions. They also simplified a bit the handling of the VATIN and phone numbers, because it is now encapsuled inside the PL/pgSQL function and Go does not know how to assemble the parts.
2023-03-26 00:32:53 +00:00
add_contact [schema_numerus extension_vat email extension_pg_libphonenumber extension_uri country_code tag_name contact] 2023-03-25T22:32:37Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to create new contacts
Replace tag relations with array attributes It all started when i wanted to try to filter invoices by multiple tags using an “AND”, instead of “OR” as it was doing until now. But something felt off and seemed to me that i was doing thing much more complex than needed, all to be able to list the tags as a suggestion in the input field—which i am not doing yet. I found this article series[0] exploring different approaches for tagging, which includes the one i was using, and comparing their performance. I have not actually tested it, but it seems that i have chosen the worst option, in both query time and storage. I attempted to try using an array attribute to each table, which is more or less the same they did in the articles but without using a separate relation for tags, and i found out that all the queries were way easier to write, and needed two joins less, so it was a no-brainer. [0]: http://www.databasesoup.com/2015/01/tag-all-things.html
2023-04-07 19:31:35 +00:00
edit_contact [schema_numerus email extension_uri country_code tag_name contact extension_vat extension_pg_libphonenumber] 2023-03-25T23:20:27Z jordi fita mas <jordi@tandem.blog> # Add function to edit contacts