[NOT-CX-Release] Created er diagram internal datamodel for Trace-X with PUML

[ds-jleyh]

Please check the following things I noticed:

• why are there SQL statements as comments in the SQL Script? (tx-backend/src/main/resources/db/migration/V1__base_sql_configuration.sql)
• Some attributes are written with quotation marks, is this intended? (e.g. in file: tx-backend/src/main/resources/db/migration/V1__base_sql_configuration.sql table: public.assets_as_planned attribute: "owner")
• Perhaps we need to insert "include" in order to add the diagram to our documentation
• Please check if I've done the table relations correctly

[github-actions]

Integration Test Results

215 tests   215 ✔️  1m 47s ⏱️
  32 suites      0 💤
  32 files        0 ❌

Results for commit 484b8f6.

[github-actions]

Unit Test Results

225 tests   222 ✔️  25s ⏱️
  54 suites      3 💤
  54 files        0 ❌

Results for commit 484b8f6.

[sonarqubecloud]

[Trace-X Root] Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[sonarqubecloud]

[TX Traceability FOSS frontend] Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[ds-mwesener]

Please check the following things I noticed:

• why are there SQL statements as comments in the SQL Script? (tx-backend/src/main/resources/db/migration/V1__base_sql_configuration.sql)
• Some attributes are written with quotation marks, is this intended? (e.g. in file: tx-backend/src/main/resources/db/migration/V1__base_sql_configuration.sql table: public.assets_as_planned attribute: "owner")
• Perhaps we need to insert "include" in order to add the diagram to our documentation
• Please check if I've done the table relations correctly

Hi @ds-jleyh the ERM seems not to be correct. When looking into your uml I see relationships from assets_as_built but not for assets_as_planned. As the two entities have same relationships this is wrong.
There are also some other issues related to relations.
The entities with attributes seems to be fine for me in the first look.

[ds-mwesener]

Please address feedback.

[hgo-ds]

Suggestion:

Consider renaming to

Suggested change

	catenax_site_id : varchar(255)
	catena_x_site_id : varchar(255)

This leads to the (correct) attribute name catenaXSiteId after JPA default mapping according to https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/sldt-semantic-models/blob/main/io.catenax.part_site_information_as_planned/1.0.0/PartSiteInformationAsPlanned.ttl#L77

[hgo-ds]

There are apparently several spellings for the attribute, clarification requested:
eclipse-tractusx/sldt-semantic-models#470

[ds-mwesener]

@ds-ashanmugavel / @ds-jleyh please give a short information if you keep working on that pull request or not. If not please close this pr with comment.

[ds-jleyh]

Hi @ds-mwesener ,

@ds-ashanmugavel is currently working on this task but on a different branch. Therefore, I will close this PR. Thanks for asking.