代做Database Development and Design (DTS207TC) Assessment 002: Individual Coursework调试SQL 程序
- 首页 >> WebDatabase Development and Design (DTS207TC)
Assessment 002: Individual Coursework
Due: Dec 24th, 2024 @ 23:59
Weight: 40%
Maximum Marks: 100
Overview & Outcomes
This course work will be assessed for the following learning outcomes:
C. Illustrate the issues related to Web technologies and DBMS and XML as a semi-structured data representation formalism.
D. Identify the principles underlying object-relational models.
Submission
You must submit the following files to LMO:
1)A report named as Your_Student_ID.pdf.
2)A directory containing all your source code, named as Your_Student_ID_code.
NOTE: The report shall be in A4 size, size 11 font, and shall not exceed 8 pages in length. You can include only key code snippets in your reports. The complete source code can be placed in the attachment.
Assessment Tasks
Now we have some stock-related datasets in XML format (attached). We would like to put it on a website for users to query.
1) Browse through these XML files in the attachment, and define DTD and XML Schema for them. Use both definitions to validate the XML files and manually fix any potential errors. Extract the file headers from the XML Schema and convert the XML to CSV. Open the generated CSV with any editor and take a screenshot. (20 Marks)
2) Use flask_sqlalchemy in Flask to build an ORM for the CSV from task 1), and import the data into PostgreSQL. Manually draw an Entity-Relationship diagram for the three tables, take a photo, and include it in the report. (20 Marks)
3) Use Flask to implement the required web page as shown in the diagram, which includes a table with the necessary fields. To differentiate yourself, you can set the form. style. to your preference and take a screenshot. (20 Marks)
4) Based on task 3), add filtering functionalities for stock name, start time, and end time,
implementing a page as shown below. Note that one or more of these filter conditions can be empty, meaning no filtering based on that condition. To differentiate yourself, you can set the form. style. to your preference and take a screenshot. (20 Marks)
5) Use the provided testing program to perform. a performance test on task 4). The program uses a POST request to query with all conditions set to empty, which should return the full result set. As long as the returned content is correct, you can optimize performance in any way. Take a screenshot of the test results. Ideal performance should be no higher than 0.2 seconds per query. (20 Marks)
NOTE:
a. Provide a brief introduction to the program logic in your own words; including code
snippets is encouraged, but please do not directly paste the entire program into the report without explanation;
b. For your full academic development, the use of generative AI to gain inspiration is allowed for this assignment; however, out of mutual respect, please do not directly paste its output into your assignment and submit it;
c. To prove that you have indeed completed this assignment and did not rely solely on generative AI, please provide screenshots of the running results for each task
Marking Criteria
The tasks in this assessment can be divided into 3 categories:
Charts Presentation & Analysis;
Essay;
Programs.
|
Criteria(%) |
Exemplary (100) |
Good (75) |
Satisfactory (50) |
Limited (25) |
Very Limited (0) |
|
Design |
Provides a detailed, accurate description of the methods. Provide comprehensive comparison between the methods, including pros and cons, performance analysis. |
The analysis provided demonstrates that the student's understanding of the various methods is correct and that they have the ability to solve problems independently. Although there are certain flaws, or incomplete. |
Provides adequate description of the methods. Comparison is provided with some level of details, however, with some obvious mistakes. |
There are obvious deviations in the understanding of the main methods, and it fails to reflect the ability to independently design algorithms. The description of the problem is vague, or the thought is incomplete. |
Limited or no description of methods. Limited comparison provided. |
|
Programs |
Demonstrated correctly implemented code that produces correct output. Excellent coding quality follows best practices. |
The program runs correctly and gives the expected results. However, special cases are not fully considered, or the program performs redundant calculations. |
Program basically works correctly for major functionality, however, with some conceptional problems. |
The program implements some minor functionality, or incorrectly implements major functionality. There is a certain degree of misunderstanding about the requirements of the questions. |
Program works incorrectly with limited attempt or irrelevant to the task. |
|
Charts |
Excellent |
Most of the |
Moderate |
Only some of the |
Limited or no |
|
Presentation |
quality of |
results in the |
quality of |
results in the |
attempt of |
|
& Analysis |
report with |
chart are |
report with |
chart are correct, |
report. |
|
|
clear structure, |
correct, but |
basic |
or some of them |
|
|
|
clear logic, |
there is a |
structure, |
are not filled in. |
|
|
|
concise writing, pleasing visual aids. |
certain degree of sloppy or wordy in the overview and analysis. |
where writing and visual aids can be improved. |
The analysis of the results was obviously biased. |
|
The mark allocations for the above tasks are:
|
Task |
Design |
Programs |
Charts Presentation & Analysis |
|
1 |
0 |
17 |
3 |
|
2 |
15 |
5 |
0 |
|
3 |
10 |
5 |
5 |
|
4 |
0 |
15 |
5 |
|
5 |
10 |
8 |
2 |