GEANT / met

Metadata Explorer Tool
BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License
17 stars 13 forks source link

Feature request: Count of unique entities #2

Closed nicoleharris closed 9 years ago

nicoleharris commented 9 years ago

Would be useful to be able to see a count of the unique entities within MET as many of the SPs / IdPs are duplicated across federations.

biancini commented 9 years ago

Nicole, don't get the meaning of this question. On met homepage we have counters under "Entities summary" Entities 16033 IDP 5971 SP 10061 This is not what you're asking for? What could be a solution to satisfy your request? Thanks

nicoleharris commented 9 years ago

Hey Andrea

So I am assuming that the total of entities includes each instance of the entity - so all 23 instances of https://met.refeds.org/met/entity/http%253A%252F%252Fshibboleth.ebscohost.com/ plus all 20 instances of https://met.refeds.org/met/entity/https%253A%252F%252Fsp.tshhosting.com%252Fshibboleth/ etc. Is that right?

I was wondering if it would be possible to calculate also the number of unique entities across the federations (so only counting Ebscohost once etc).

Does that make sense?

Cheers

Nicole

On 11/05/2015 10:33, Andrea Biancini wrote:

Nicole, don't get the meaning of this question. On met homepage we have counters under "Entities summary" Entities 15743 IDP 5838 SP 9907 This is not what you're asking for? What could be a solution to satisfy your request? Thanks

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/TERENA/met/issues/2#issuecomment-100833005.

Nicole Harris Project Development Officer GÉANT Association Amsterdam Office (formerly TERENA) Singel 468 D, 1017 AW Amsterdam The Netherlands Skype: harrisnv M:+31 64 610 53 95

biancini commented 9 years ago

Yes it makes sense. I was sure the totals where not double-counting, but I did the math and... well it is happening. It's a good idea to fix!

biancini commented 9 years ago

Now sums should be correct! In fact the totals are lower than the sum of all federation's count (as expected). Will do some more cross check, but the computation logic seems right.