So a basic version for associations seems pretty easy to implement as discussed above. Here my suggestion:

Definition and use with REST URIs:

// Both associations should only work if there is a /users service registered already
app.use('/users', userService)
  .use('/posts', postsService)
  .use('/accounts', accountService);

// Pass service name in an array
// Calls postsService.findAll({ userId: <userId> })
app.associate('/users/:userId/posts', ['posts']);

// Calls userService.get(<userId>) then calls
// accountService.get(user.account)
app.associate('/users/:userId/account', 'accounts');

For SocketIO:

The easiest way is probably this:

socket.emit('/users/:userId/posts', { userId: 123 }, function(error, posts) {
});

I understand that

socket.emit('/users/123/posts', function(error, posts) {
});

Might look appealing but in reality you'd probably always end up with annoying string concatenation like socket.emit('/users/' + someId + '/posts') which is why I think using an object instead makes more sense (plus any additional parameters can be passed as service params).

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

We need to support relationships between resources #22

Description

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions